Almost ready now...
Soon the TON list of the all new features ( not only video..)

Ahhhh so Frans BIG wish to get his scrolling lyrics with his MP3 files is finally going to happen

Dennis

when i first saw title of this post, OS 4.3
i was thinking it was the Ketron OS

ROFL ....

yes..
we are slow here to develope..BUT at the end I give always what I had promised.
More Groove I sell, more new OS and features you get..simple...and the hardware remain the same

For running one Mpeg there, you have to wait the OS 4300

if you are slow to develop,
what can we say about the "others" ???

what i like is that you are honest and LISTEN to your customers,

i have to check out your products :-)

MAYBE with the OS 4.3, we release also the new mainboards drivers for the Groove X-7 EXTREME3


USB 3.0!
SATA 3-6Gb!
Six core CPU.
16Gb RAM DDR3-1600!
Dual Sata3 HD 1Tb RAID.
This hardware and special OS wil be released ONLY for the Xtreme3 Groove models.

LIONSTRACS


was on your site

do you not have demos (Audio/Video) for your products?

are you missing something or am i?

USB 3.0!
SATA 3-6Gb!
Six core CPU.
16Gb RAM DDR3-1600!
Dual Sata3 HD 1Tb RAID.

WOW,
now THESE are some SERIOUS MODERN SPECS

Now here is a man who understand English, buy a KB off him and we will use some of the money to develop the software further, what a bloody brilliant idea. Ketron are your reading this, but you get the hardware right first. Miracles take a little longer.

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 05-26-2010).]

and can you feel the love tonight...

Leezone,

Don't take too long you have been doing that with Audya for the last year to my knowledge, there is a good chance one or two of use will have dropped off the end before you get your hand in your pocket, and that would entail making a decision, not something you have done for a while.

Tony


once your problems are fixed with AUDYA
you will fall back in love

"Go on, go on, until you reach the end of the line
But I know you'll pass my way again
It's just a matter of time...."

Leezone I'm here again!

You�re a poet,
and you don't know it.

Leezone,

No messing about now, what do you think of the Groove X7?

i never played one,
so i can't and won't say if it's good or bad

but from what i know, it's more of a DJ, loop like, vst player,
not a true arranger

i need an arranger FIRST and foremost...

You know, it's strange how that fact seems to be at the top of every ARRANGER player's list of needs, and somehow at the bottom of the open arranger fans' list.

With the live arranger and the Q-ranger you have 2 Arrangers in one instrument.

Can you name any arranger that tops that?


Actually the mediastation can be what you want it to be : DAW, arranger, Synth workstation, Deejay tool or what ever your needs are. But if you just use the standard sounds and styles of your Arranger and never edit them then a closed arranger will be a great choice for you.... And to be honest, there are no bad sounding (TOTL) arrangers anymore.

Its a matter of Taste but Tyros, G70, Audya, PA2X they all sound great. But Giga samples and VST's just even sound better. But not so good that they would make a bad player sound better.

I believe a Giga and VST voiced arranger WOULD make an amateur sound better... but only if a PRO voices and styles it for them (like they do for closed arrangers).

If you don't, then the amateur has to voice and style it himself, and then all hell breaks loose. The day someone making open arrangers realizes this basic fact, open arrangers are going to dominate the market. Until then, they are NOT...

Dom admitted that fact already, the basic soundset of the MS is allready high quallity and the standard GM giga samples are even much better.

HErman is creating a complete high quallity Q-ranger style data-base. Someone else is making a Ketron Giga soundset so all Ketron sounds/styles sound better out of the box on a MS then on an Audya.

Its happening Diki, and if you'd be only ready to wake up you could have seen it with your own eyes. In a few weeks you will be able to hear the results tough.

[This message has been edited by Bachus (edited 05-28-2010).]

Excellent can't wait.

Just finished an intense two days in the Studio here and I ended up only using two keyboards for the entire project. That's a first for me, normally I'd draw on everything I own. Lol... My trusty AKAI S5000 sat this one out for the first time every.

I guess it works out about at 60% OASYS - 40% Mediastation for this project. The Mediastation was doing all the mega Sample based stuff and the OASYS was doing drums and the evolving synth based stuff. Very enjoyable and what a totally mind blowing setup it is to own both fine instruments.

Best of the best.

Regards
James

Thats Great James it must sound awesome for sure. Would love to hear a few snippets if you would when its done.

Good Luck

Seems you have the best of both worlds...Best sounding closed synth with Karma onboard combined with the most advanced open arranger.

While they don't realise but most keyboard players can only dream about this combination.

Still its sad there are only so few Oasys sold, and i don't think Korg will make an improved version of it anytime soon.

i think its about time that the MS had styles specifically programmed for its internall sounds. Now we should be able to see the true potential of well balanced skillfully programmed styles on par with the likes of roland, yamaha and Korg instead of the passable to good styles it has had so far. This would at least get it into the starting blocks as an arranger.

Just tested and full working!

here the Groove X7 Extreme3, with the new AM3-770Extreme3 mainboard, Six core CPU and Sata3/6Gb HD 1Tb.. of course..USB3 included.


I'm uploading on youtube the video hardware to prove it.

about the OS 4.3..we delay it some days untill is also ready the new Big features and new Interface, the Giga Sounbank loader!
Will allow to load in realtime Up to 12 LSCP sounbank by file browser( system like the Giga Solo edit mode)
In this way you can create your own LSCP name soundbank and load direct by the interface.
The tool wil also display in realtime the Sampler scanning information and will shown IF some sounds are missing, brocken and so on.
A NEW Yamaha GIGA soundbank is ready and also cloned the SD2 and audya sounds from another MS user.
Tastenpoit have about ready now 80 native audio styles...
Slow slow we arrival...

Thats exactly what Helmut at Tastenpoint is doing right now.

(he allready has 80 of those styles finished and is aiming to create over 200 of those) all those styles will be onboard of the Tastenpoint Mediastations/Grooves.

That is super news Domenico...great work..And that new machinery looks "sweeeet"

The multiple LSCP will be a HUGE improvement!!

Can't wait

As I said in an other thread, Lionstracs HAVE arrived, and the steady river flow is going to soon be a torrent...I would not mind buying some shares now

Dennis

we see more and more user friendly things.

good work Domenico and Lionstracs team.

Is it someone we know that I could talk to?
I have a few questions I'd like to ask them.

Regards
James

Just looked up the prices of that hardware...

mainboard �80
CPU 2.8Ghz �190
CPU 3.2Ghz �285
4x4GB DDR3 memmory kit > �600

Now thats some expensive memmory.

Because of de size restrictions Groove can prolly only handle motherboards with 4 Dims, and so you need to buy the very expensive 4GB DDR3 modules.

I don't know tough if Lionstracs supports people that want to upgrade the hardware of their systems.

A question to Dom :
Those 2 PCI PCB's, are those the interfaces to the soundhardware?

Can you just imagine the speed of that monster. If money was no object, throw a 256GB SSD in there and it would be totally insane. Drooling here.

The second prices start to drop on SSD's I'll be putting one on my own Meidastation.

Regards
James

A small OS update candy...

still some script text sampler feedback to optimize and then is ready..
For today enough.

Its looking good Domenico!!

Looks like you have the multiple LSCP's sorted too...Sweet!!

Dennis

[This message has been edited by miden (edited 05-31-2010).]

Excellent.
This will come in extremely handy for me because I've got a virtual SD2 running on my Mediastation right now

Regards
James

Hi James,

Where did the virtual SD2 come from? Did you sample your hardware SD2?

Is is possible to buy it somewhere? Coz I cannot find an SD2 out here anywhere (s/h that is, I am not paying new prices )

Dennis

Hi Dennis.



Yes I sampled my unit, not all of it though. There are 4 banks of sound, each with 128 sounds in them. Bank A is the core GM bank and that's what I've sampled. That and all the drum kits.

I haven't touched the other 3 banks yet.



Domenico said above that someone has already cloned the SD2 and the Audya so I assume he's going to release that for free.

I'd love to know who done the work and how much effort they put in. It's not easy to do this right and the amount of time it would have taken to sample all 512 sounds is insane. Can't imagine anyone wanting to do that amount of work for free. It's a massive job.

Regards
James

Yeah, I agree. Thats why I was asking if you would be prepared to sell a licence to me to use your samples.

Although I am not sure of the copyright with Ketron, or if thats allowed??

In any case I should be able to assign the LA out to VST's I think..So its probably a moot point.

I have not gone that far into LA...Yet!!

Dennis

If all of those soundsets will be high quallity, then we are getting close to walhalla...

Domenic claimed someone had cloned the T2 back in the day... I wonder what happened to that?

We certainly have never heard a T2 style played on the MS that sounded anything like a T2!

James is right in the herculean scale of adequately sampling an entire arranger's worth of sounds. Plus, as he well knows, it isn't just about sampling each sound once... you have to take envelopes, modulations and velocity x-splits into account, all across the usable range of the sound. It's just another of those ideas that SEEM like a good idea until you realize the workload involved to get an adequate result...

There is a Tyros folder on the keyboard that contains lots of sounds. The problem is whoever did the work never finished what they started. Many sounds are not even looped, nor is there a LSCP file to use the sound in a GM Bank for style playback.



Yes, sampling is an art. You have to be seriously committed to the task in order to do it right. I've been doing this 15 years and I will tell anyone straight out, it's a long and painful process to achieve top quality results.

Take my Virtual SD2 for example. I had to listen to each and every sound in detail one by one and adjust my key maps so that I capture the right notes in order to reproduce the sound as close to the original as possible. Then I have to take the time to loop each and every single sample that makes up each sound. In the end I then have to turn around and make the LSCP file so it will run on the keyboard for style playback. The entire process takes a very very long time even for someone like me and it's by no means easy.

Do it right though and the results are fantastic. I've already done some A vs B tests to compare the actual SD2 to my Virtual SD2 and it's extremely hard to tell the difference between them. It's also worth the effort in the end for me because now I don't have to touch a Ketron style and I get very good results out of the box with no tweaks.

Regards
James

Just to add to what I said..... Where I am right now is the closest the Mediastation has ever been to being an all singing and dancing open arranger out of the box. With my Virtual SD2 there is little to no tweaking required for Ketron styles at all which are just pulled of the net and loaded into the keyboard.

What would be ideal at this point is if the legal position on doing all this was made crystal clear and if people like me could then turn around and sell the work I've just done so nobody else has to.

I know it's perfectly legal for me to do this for myself since I own an SD2. But... where do I stand on selling the data is almost an impossible question to answer with any certainty. It's a debate as old as sampling itself.

Ketron sample Vintage gear for example to produce their synth sounds.

Regards
James

agree with you, the one who sampled sounds even not used powerful extreme editor x-fade function to make good loops................

Yeah, x-fade is very powerful. You can be sure it was used on all my samples.

Regards
James.

Dom, I am biting at the bit....when will we see 4.3?

Friday we burn the ISO with 64studio, then I test and Uploading on server.
I think for saturday is ready to download and enjoy your 70.000 Mp3-CDG!

So, the OS 4.3 I think is ready now.
Tomorrow we will see if 64studio have the time to building all and bur the new ISO OS 4.3.

Here the last updates:

Press SETUP key and will display the all setup features, the Patch C is changed for use the LSCP soundbank loader.

Here the LSCP Sounbank loader update with the Scrollbar Up/Down and left/right.
I have added the left/righ scrollbar because now IF one sounds is missing/bad/wrong...the sampler type one Error sounds and will display the whole file path.
In this way you can see where is the soundbug and fix yourself.
then just reload the LSCP file and the sampler check again, the OK mean that the sound is loaded correct.

For the debug test, i have splitted ( copy/paste) the MS-02-instruments.lscp file and created many others with a parts groups sounds.
on restart, the system have loaded all, midiplayer have played the all tracks correct.

so..in this new system, you can create new small LSCP soundbank with the only sounds that you need on system.
I made for example a LSCP bank of the only drumkits, one for the Pianos and so on.
On restart the system will load all and merge all in realtime.
LACP sounbank files are now UNLIMITED, same way as the sounpatch..
James..enough for you?

The news here are not finish...)
First the building and release soon the new OS 4.3 promised...BUT..
From monday we start also building the new Linux Kubuntu 10.04 distribution on the new LIONSTRACS OS 4.5!


Understand what I mean?
Ah..forget...this is the AFG music Mediastation with the new Kubuntu 10.04...


[This message has been edited by LIONSTRACS (edited 06-03-2010).]

That looks lika an old one, must have been a pre production model

Dom... any chance of learning to scale your pictures so they don't overflow the page width here?

James... I think the answer to your cloning dilemma is easy. Just apply the Golden Rule. If YOU had made an
entire soundset for an arranger (or any keyboard) and had poured vast sums of money into making it sound great
would you be happy if someone came along, cloned it as accurately as possible, and then either sold it or gave it
away for free? Would you be likely to ever make another one? Would you want to sue the pants off the infringer?

I think, in all likelihood, that the same standards that apply to using samples of commercial music would apply.
If you use tiny snippets, and make the end result VERY different from the original, you are likely OK
(but even there, permission and a fee is usual if the snippet is even remotely recognizable)
but if you 'sample' an entire CD, put it out under your name and either distribute it for free or even worse, sell it
you are going to be in hot water.

'Cloning' an entire keyboard, except for one's own private use (even commercially on a record, you may be in trouble if you didn't buy the original keyboard)
is pretty much the same thing. It is outright intellectual property theft, and any company would be well
within their rights to litigate. As no doubt, you would be tempted to do if it were done to YOU.

Protecting the revenue stream from endeavor is the only way to ensure that further endeavor WILL be made.
Look at what has happened to the music industry. Look what is happening to the movie industry.
If anyone can steal anything, and give it away (or sell it) with impunity, who in their right minds is going to MAKE anything any more?

But, bottom line of all this is, doesn't this simply show how bankrupt the idea of an 'open' arranger is?
That it has to 'steal' the sounds of a closed one before it is any good... Wasn't the promise of something BETTER? That anyone would go to these lengths simply
demonstrates how hard it is to simply get a collection of high quality VSTi's, and make something that blows away
the poor arrangers you are trying so hard to clone.

Anyway, simply follow the Golden Rule, and you KNOW it's wrong to distribute an arranger clone soundset.
I certainly wouldn't expect to make any money from it. After all, if you can steal it from Ketron
then it's OK for them to steal your work from YOU, isn't it?

Hi Domencio.
I'm truly impressed. This is excellent work and HUGE news.

Well done.!!!!!

James

Diki...

Does Steinway make any money when someone sells a CD with a steinway piano on it? Does Steinway make any money when someone samples a Steinway piano?

No they don't... So why should Yamaha or Korg make any money when someone samples the sample they took from a Steinway?

Diki.
Where do you think all the waveforms for all keyboards come from ?
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just pointing out that every keyboard manufacture going samples sounds from other keyboards and instruments.

James.

Actually yes, if you sample a piano an SELL it as 'Steinway samples', you have to pay Steinway a license fee.

The issue isn't that someone sampled a Steinway. It is that someone spent a FORTUNE sampling that Steinway,
and you did nothing but copy their data. You didn't call in a string section at great expense, and spend a week getting all the notes
and articulations. You let them do all the work, then stole it. You didn't hire a bunch of first call horn player, you let someone else do all the work, and then STOLE it.

MAKE YOUR OWN SAMPLES, THIEF... (then remain silent while someone steals them for profit).

If I break into your warehouse and steal an MS, how is it any different? You spent a fortune making it.
I want it for free. Why can't I take it? You think YOU have a right to make a profit, but the sample makers DON'T?

Hey, James... send me ALL your commercial samples. No, I won't pay for them. I just want them. If you don't,
I will just take them. Sound OK with you?

How about that Corvette, Dom? I know you paid for it, but what right do you have to keep it..? I want it.
And I don't want to have to pay for it. By your own rules, I can come
and get it any time I want.

See you soon...

Be careful. Dom has a gun.

chas

So does Yamaha, Korg, Ketron and Roland... or at least their lawyers do BIG GUNS... against a tiny
company. More like taking a knife to a gunfight, I'd say. Tread lightly, Dom. Posting on this forum counts
as evidence of intent

Anyway, I'm not going to steal it while he's LOOKING...! I'll stab him in the back while he's
sleeping, like a good Italian... (Tony Hughes made me say that! I would NEVER harm someone from a
country that gave us Ferrari, Pagani and Lamborghini..! Mind you, Fiat makes me
reach for the stiletto )


[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-03-2010).]

get the lock ready !

Problem is the Dik, does not get it...James is NOT selling Ketron samples.

He would be selling IrishActs samples created by him...

No different of he samples a Yamaha Grand, then creates his own sample base from HIS recorded sample.

No copyright on a sound wave coming from a piano.

No different if he goes outside records some birds tweeting.

No copyright on soundwaves....

Diki is just taking nonsense.

I ask him only one question and he avoids answer it.

James

Yes James, he does seem to have a habit of doing that. Avoiding questions that cast some doubt on his "statements of fact".

He does not seem to have the humility to admit error (that may not be true but it certainly SEEMS that way).

So he then replies using selected words form the original poster, totally disregards the syntax, and posts a convoluted reply to cover up his initial error. (Again perhaps not intentional, but that is how it comes across, well to me anyway)

Dennis

From what I have seen over the years is that no-one including Yamaha and Roland name their patches from the original instruments they sampled them from. For example I very much doubt whether anyone has been paying Rhodes for sampling the Rhodes electric piano for all these years. In fact Yamaha and Roland have been very particular about naming their Rhodes patches names like "Suitcase Electric" or something that has no copyright association. The same goes for Oberheim samples even though we all know what "Jump Brass" is really referring to. Let's get real here.

Exactly.

It also extends out to styles and song books on keyboards. Keyboard manufactures product styles based on very popular songs and pay no royalties. They then even arrange them into Song Books on the keyboards and give them a name extremely close to the song they are intended to sound like so there are no royalties to pay or any legal issues.

This even extends to actual product lines and the names the keyboards are called. They give them very generic names or model numbers because in the past there have been lawsuits over the names given to keyboards. Not just keyboards either, Apple for example have even sued supermarkets for using an Apple in their logo.

It's all about trademarks and using existing named products to help promote your own. So long as you stay away form that, then there's quite a lot you can do that's legally sound.

As I said above, every keyboard manufacture on the face of the planet samples other keyboards and real world instruments. None of them have to pay any royalties either because they don't use the names of the products they are sampling, or there's a generic name. Silver Flute, Golden Trumpet, 80's Synth, Take Me On, and so on...

A musical instrument, as in a keyboard is a physical object. The sound it produces is it's function and cannot be copyrighted. If it could then Ketron and everyone else would not be allowed to sample the instruments they did to create the sounds their products produce. This is also not something a keyboard manufacture can just change their mind on when it suites them either. They sample their sounds from other instruments to product their products, then they have no right to protect the sound their instrument produces, just as the manufacture they took their sounds from had no rights to protect their sound.

James.

I don't see where the moral confusion comes from...

If you go out and sample a Fender Rhodes, and do a good job, it will take you WEEKS. You have to
meticulously record every note, at multiple velocities, carefully loop them (unless you are doing a GIGA thing
where you have enough memory to not need loops (that is NOT the case with arranger soundsets!)
and then carefully lay them out on the keyboard. A LOT of work. You expect to get PAID for that work...
Now someone comes along and samples YOUR samples. No weeks of work. No meticulous editing.
No hiring or buying the source instrument. No needing expensive mikes or pre's. Just copy the data.

If you can't make the connection between that and simple theft, you are lost, my friends... I simply hope no-one does what I posted in jest.
But if they were, what is the difference? You worked long and hard for what you own.
I hope that no-one does to you what you are saying it is alright to do to someone else. Ketron didn't sample
a T3 for their samples. They'd be in court right now if they did. And so will you, if you take this nonsense seriously.

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-05-2010).]

In the example above, how do you think the maker of the Fender Rhodes feels about all the hard work and money they put in to making the instrument in developing that instrument and now some one goes and samples the sound?

This is getting ridiculous!!

Following that, how about how Stradivarius would feel, or whoever it was that created the first piano, or Adolph Sax...I could go on and on...

Soundwaves can be freely sampled. Where DO you think Yamaha, Roland Korg et al, got THEIR rhodes samples??

And you can bet your bottom dollar they paid not one cent to Leo Fender, either before he died or to his descendants. Nor to messrs Sax and Stradivarius.

I repeat, a ridiculous argument.

What I DO agree with is that if I sold or gave away say, a full sample set CREATED by East West, then THAT is a breach of the licence of use. The samples THEY created. But their source sounds for sampling in the first place are not covered by any copyright.

A good analogy I think, could be sidewalk artists...They would own a copyright of whatever they paint on the sidewalk, BUT they have no copyright over either the paints they used, nor the sidewalk itself.

Of course!
Everyone knows that there is no legal copyright of the source sound.
But what we are discussing is the financial effect it has on the source instrument.

If I have the Fender Rhodes sound on my Korg, Yamaha or Roland keyboard I get the benefit of having and using that sound with out Fender Rhodes getting any money.

They (Fender Rhodes) had put in all the RD and money in developing that instrument and being able to get that sound. Now someone comes and samples the sound of that instrument and includes it on their instruments. As a result, people do not buy the Fender Rhodes but buy the instrument that sampled the Fender Rhodes sounds. So the user gets the benefit of having a Fender Rhodes sound with out paying Fender Rhodes.


If I have the T3sounds on my MS keyboard I get the benefit of having and using the T3 sound with out Yamaha getting any money.

They (Yamaha) had put in all the RD and money in developing that instrument and being able to get that sound. Now someone comes and samples the sound of that instrument and includes it on their instruments. As a result, people do not buy the T3 but buy the instrument that sampled the T3 sounds. So the user gets the benefit of having a T3 sound with out paying Yamaha.

The concept of someone taking other�s work with out paying for it has been going on for many many years in the music business.
Its just that the law protects some and not others.
But it happens all in the name of development and progress.

The point is, there are no T3 sounds, there are just sounds..

Because Tough Yamaha spend a lot of time creating those sounds, All they did in the end was copy those sounds from another source.

Same goes for the open systems but instead of a company copying and improving sounds... now there is the community copying and improving sounds..


And the same goes for Styles...

Did Yamaha ever pay a penny to the Strauss fammilly for adding those Waltz styles. Or even pay a penny for that "hardrockstyle7" that just happens to be exactly the same as a big hit from KISS, but beleive me, KISS or the record company have never seen a penny from that style.


I agree that Midi files and MP3's are of a different measure... but thats about it.


Overhere in the world of Open systems and community, its the community(ideally) creating the content, best excample is : James new string gigasamples created by James and shared with the community. If the Community grows and people start to share everyone becomes a happier person, tough noboddy will get rich from it, but everyone will be a happier person in the end.

Is this the 'open' community that believes that ALL software should be free, or that ALL music, movies,
e-books etc., should be free? You know, the ones that are STEALING it and ruining the industries that produce that content?

This is unbelievable... that none of you can make the differentiation between sampling an ACOUSTIC instrument,
one of the most difficult processes in music, and sampling a sample... obviously, one of the easiest.
You are getting outraged at the wrong thing. No-one is saying it's any crime to go out and sample a violin, or a piano
or even a Rhodes. It's possibly a crime to market those as 'Fender Rhodes' or 'Steinway' without permission from the maker
(if he's still in business), but it's a long held accepted practice that sampling acoustic instruments (and out of
production synths, too) is legal. But it is NOT clear that you can sample for commercial use the samples contained
in a production, current keyboard. The operative word is 'commercial' use, and free distribution. In other words, yes
it's perfectly OK for you to sample a T3 for your own use ONLY, but it is illegal to distribute it. Just like a CD,
for instance. You can copy it legally for your own use, but you can't sell or share it.

But that some of you can't make the difference between sampling a Stradivarius and sampling an Audya
is baffling. It's the difference between writing a song, and someone copying that song... What's even more
disturbing is the complete lack of empathy (or guilt!) about your espoused theft of intellectual property. Can't
ANYONE put themselves in the position of someone who just spent a fortune making a TOTL soundset for
an arranger (you can't buy them at 'Samples-are-Us'!)
and someone says it's OK to copy your samples for free and distribute them to EVERYONE..?

Would you be happy if they did that? And if you wouldn't, you've answered your own question...

What amazes me is that James, who makes COMMERCIAL sample sets, isn't jumping in here and trying
to clear the issue up. Honestly, what you are saying is, it's OK to STEAL James' work... Just copy his data,
don't pay him a penny. Now, what do you think are the chances of him making another high quality set
for you to steal? Slim to none...

I am not saying it's wrong to sample a T3. All I am saying is it is illegal to distribute it. As is obvious from
your comments, the T2 set for the MS is so bad, it isn't a factor, but can you imagine Yamaha staying silent
should anyone do a GOOD job and clone their very expensively produced product to the point of indistinguishability..?
The samples that they MADE are theirs. Not yours, unless you buy their product, and then they are for your use only.

It's simple, when you think about it...

BTW, James CHOSE to make his string samples 'open'. But has he made his entire sample library 'open'?
The creator of a sample set MUST have the right to say whether they are 'open' or NOT. Or those that create
those great commercial sample sets will STOP making them. Does anyone REALLY want that?

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-06-2010).]

mmmmm...again with this old story now...
Now IF I listen Diki start to be really a big problem..
I just dowloaded the new Giga Yammy soundbank, 1003 new, edited and mapped sounds: http://lionstracs.com/download/soundbank1.lscp
This all sounds I will include on the all new Groove that we shipping now from here..,
But for the all others old MS/Groove custumers what we make??
Do I have to DELETE this all sounds from my server OR someone there will have it for FREE??
IF someone there is interested on this new GIGA Yammy soundbank, have to write here: I WANT IT then I allow for the FREE download.
( I have only to see where to move this folder because is aroung 8.7Gb data..)
Now is really a morality, but I really want to see who is interested to have it and do not care about RESAMPLING cloning legallity.

Note also that I have started to download the new GIGA-AUDY soundbank and then the new GIGA-FantoG
IF you there are NOT interested of this new FREE giga sounds...no problems...

I just love it, free high quallity giga sounds, i'd say Yummy


And to Diki.... there is no difference between Yammaha sampling a fender rhodes and the open source community sampling the yamaha sample of a Fender Rhodes.

And the open source community is not about copying software for free, its all about creating software and sharing it for free.. But then you seem to have no clue at all that some people in this world still love to help others for free and share their experiences with them for free.

Dom I want them. I already have most of those T2 samples in my Psr s900 but I want them in my MsS too. And I'm also very interested in the Audya and FanoG Giga.

Oh! I forgot.... I WANT IT

+1

+2

+1

Even tough i don't have a lionstracs (yet) i am interested in those giga samples to use with my live-styler setup.

(Tough i can understand if you restrict this offer to Lionstracs owners only)

Bachus, if the 'open' community wants a sampled Rhodes, go out and sample a Rhodes...

If you can't see the difference between that and sampling someone who already did all the WORK for you,
you aren't even trying.

There are people that thought that ALL music should be free, that no-one should EVER have to buy a CD again.
They traded mp3's around like bubblegum cards. Now the music industry is in collapse. If you can't get PAID
for your work, who is going to do it? Those people are now
being sued for copyright infringement. And if wholesale sampling of an entire arrangers' soundset
ever becomes more than a pipedream, and it becomes more than just a joke to the big boys,
you are going to see the lawyers come calling like they do to
big MP3 distributors and movie servers.

It's simple... do the sampling YOURSELF, no problem. Sample something that someone has ALREADY sampled
(or simply copy the data) and you are stealing their work. It can't be any more obvious than that...

Whether you sample the original instrument or sample someone�s samples, the effect is the same.
In both situations, you are causing some one to lose money.

You can not say one is OK an not the other.

If you want the Rhodes sound, buy a Rhodes

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 06-06-2010).]

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 06-06-2010).]

And not a Motif ES, XS or a Kurzweil PC1SE, or any of the Rolands or , or , or

Yet another ridiculous statement on this ridiculous debate.

So you would agree that every sax sampler should pay a royalty to Adolph Saxs' descendants? And every one should also pay a royalty to Leo Fender and Harry Rhodes descendants too?
And the same for those Stradivarius samples?

It would be like trying to copyright air...We certainly did not create it, but we all use it for free...

�It would be like trying to copyright air...We certainly did not create it, but we all use it for free...�


And that statement demonstrates what the argument is not.

Yes we can not copyright air because we did not do any thing to create it.


However, a lot of work and time and money were put in to creating a Rhodes, sax and so on.
That is the point Diki is making.
The effect of having these sounds on a keyboard is that less people would buy the actual
instrument.

There is a counter point to my point but I am surprised no one has mentioned it as yet.


[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 06-07-2010).]

With respect TTG, that is NOT the point Diki is trying to flog here.

In essence, he is saying that if James makes his OWN samples he is not able to sell them or give them away, because he sampled a soundwave.

Where the soundwave came from, is beside the point.

I DO agree that if, say, I bought James' samples, and then gave THEM away, THAT is where the copyright would be breached.

And I will add, that is not something I would EVER do to anyone. Be it sampled libraries, or songs.

Correct..do you think that this sounds developer made the all BIG work just for fun?
No...they made this work because I have payed with some money and I gave a FREE Mediastation hardware.
This is the only way for have every time NEW sounds, but this NOT mean that cost nothing.

Developing 1000 giga sounds is not a game, need months of work and then when I ask 5 or 10 euro for the Server cost Fee ( we have a own server from Theplanet USA) I have to fight with people, because they do NOT want to pay also the miresable 5 euro or made a simple Donation...

Anyway I dont care to resell sounds, why IF one pay the 5 euro Fee, another 1000 then will copy..
I leave all Open GPL and then make all what you like.



[This message has been edited by LIONSTRACS (edited 06-13-2010).]

Yes Diki gave examples.
But the underlying concept of Diki�s point is that some one put in hard work and lots of mony to create an instrument.
Some one now samples just the sound of that instrument. sampling the original instrument would stop the original instrument maker from producing that instrument.
Whether they (the new sample maker) gives it away or sell the new samples is irelivant. The original instrument maker, if they continue with their business model, could lose sales and revenue.
The effect would be the same whether the original instrument maker is the T3 or Rhodes IMO.

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 06-07-2010).]

[This message has been edited by to the genesys (edited 06-07-2010).]

I don't believe I could have been any clearer, but possibly non-English readers are missing the details. I'll spell it out.

No... it is a well established right to be able to make sample sets from acoustic instruments. Sax, strings, pianos, Rhodes (but if you use brand names, you have to sometimes pay the manufacturer a fee - after all, you are leveraging their brand name to sell your samples)

No... I said at no point whatsoever that James does not have the right to sell or distribute for free any sample sets he has created himself (where on earth could anyone have got THAT point from?). BUT... he does NOT have the right to sample exhaustively a commercial keyboard that itself sampled the sounds in it, at considerable expense and then distribute it, either for free or for commercial gain. He can make his own string library, but if he copies another commercial sample set (which those in ROMplers are, as the cost of the instrument includes the cost of the samples) he is stealing others' work.

I believe that you are either deliberately or unconsciously avoiding the TRUE point I have been trying to get over... Every keyboard manufacturer EXCEPT open keyboards spend a FORTUNE developing their soundsets for them. They DO NOT sample each others' sounds, the piano in a T3 is totally different to the piano in a PA2Xpro, etc.. The saxes, the strings, every last sound (with the possible exception of legacy drum sounds from Roland, which are no longer in production and have passed into the realm of public domain) is developed by each manufacturer themselves. At a VERY high cost.

And now, you think it OK to copy them and give them away for free... (or even worse, sell them).

THAT, and that alone is the point I am trying to get over. Yes, you can do this yourself, for your own uses ONLY (even commercial use on a work for hire MIGHT be a breach of copyright), but you can't distribute it, you can't sell it. You aren't distributing your own work. You are distributing the work that others have done, and NOT given you permission to do.

Try this... write to Yamaha, tell them you intend to clone every sound in a T3, and then you intend to sell it for an open keyboard to use. Or even give it away widely. See if they think that you can do this!

I'm sorry, but you are grasping at straws. Just like the issue with Ketron styles... sure, you WANT them to be copyright free, so you can steal them. But the FACT is, they ARE copyrighted, and you have to have a Ketron product to be able to use them legally. Same deal with samples. They ARE copyrighted. Find out from the manufacturer themselves before you ASSUME that it is OK to steal their stuff...

Where does all this stealing end? Do you think it is OK to use cracked versions of all the VSTi's you intend to use? Or a pirated version of the Ketron or Yamaha style players? I mean, is there ANY line you are not willing to cross?

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 06-07-2010).]

Diki.
You would put Harry Houdini to shame for avoiding what's in front of him. I ask you one question and you STILL do not answer me. So for the third time here goes.

Where do you think all keyboard manufactures get their sounds from?

Forget what you think about everything else and just answer that question. When you do, then apply the answer to your logic and you will see how it does not fit in at all with your concept of what copyright law on this issue is. I've had this debate countless times in all my years and nobody can prove it in writing what is right or wrong regarding this subject. All anyone can do is point out the obviously which is that everyone, Yamaha, KORG, Roland and everyone else are all at it.

So.... if everyone is at it and this is something you cannot disagree with,.... well what does that say to you?

James

Where do all the manufacturers get their sounds from? Well, one thing is certain. They don't get them from sampling another manufacturer's keyboards! They have teams that create the samples themselves. Honestly, James, I didn't answer the question because I thought it was a joke!

The string samples in a Motif were NOT sampled off a Roland. The piano sound in a Ketron was NOT copied from a Korg... The SA2 sax samples in a T3 were NOT copied from a Casio...

In the synth world, there's a fair bit of sampling out of production keyboards for their basic waveforms, but once again, the operative word is 'out of production'. Roland do not sample the factory presets of an M3 for the FantomG.

Or are you claiming they DO...?

Diki I'm not saying you are wrong.

but when you are sampling a harware music instrument, you still use the sound of a music instrument !!!!!


I give an example:

We have a painting and is copyrighted.
We have good scanner and we scan the painting. So here we infringe copyright if we do that without permission.

why for musical sound on analog synth and real instruments sounds, no copyright, but once they are digitaly sampled they are copyrighted?

In short, if you use real Intrument free sound source to make samples for your hardware instrument, and sell you're honest?????????

that's theft. why:

You make nothing new from the beginning. you do not make any new music instrument.

you scan something and make a copy (just like the painting)

I think you know that any real instrument or analog synth sound has a certain character which makes that instruments unique or not????

So if the law says this is better or not:

You can copyright what you played with a music instrument, but not the sound the instrument produces.

if a source has not a copyright then the copy can not be copyrighted too.

if the source has copyright you You must have permission from source holder to copy and copyright your works.

as a supporter of copyright,
I want that real Intrument and anlog synth makers are protected by copyright for their unique sound. because they are the source and not other companies who make samples for there hardware.

becouse:

sampling=scan somthing=digital copy of something.

copyrighted source=permission from source holder to copy and copyright your works

no copyrighted source=you can use or copy without permission, but you have no right to copyright your work.

digital hardware music instrument sound= the source real instument and analog synth sound

are you here agree?!?!



[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 06-07-2010).]

If you truly believe that then there is utterly no hope for you at all.

Ever single sound on your keyboard comes from sampling different sources. The keyboard is PCM based an totally unable to produce any sound on its own. Everything from a sampling a B3 to a 30 year old Analogue Synth goes into making your keyboard. This $hit doesn't magically appear on your keyboard just because some designer twiddles a knob. Where else do you honestly think the sounds come from ? lol... Don't know if I should laugh or cry for you.

It even doesn't matter what the end result sounds like, the source data is always taken from another product and this is the ONLY way any PCM based keybaord can work. It's the same for PCM based VSTi's too. This is the way everything works Diki regardless of what you think.

Here.. choke on this list and then click the link I put in at the end and read.

Access Virus Indigo
Access Virus A�
Access Virus B
Access Virus C�
Akai AX-80
Akai-S-612 sampler
Akai S-900 sampler
Akai S-1000 sampler
Akai S-6000 sampler
ARP String Ensemble
Casio VL-Tone
Chamberlin Tape sampler
Commodore 64
Doepfer modular
EDP Wasp Deluxe
Elka String Machine
Emu Modular (Custom)
Ensoniq Mirage
Fairlight CMI
Farfisa Organ
Fender Rhodes
Hammond B-3/C-3 Organs
Kawai K-5000 additive synth
Korg EX-8000
Korg M1-REX
Korg Monopoly
Korg Z1 EVL�
Korg Prophecy�
Kurzweil K-2000
Kurzeil K-2500
Logan Strings
Mattel Optigan
Mellotron
Hans Zimmer Custom Moog Modular
Moog 55 Modular
Moog Minimoog (Studio Electronics modified)
Nord Lead
Oberheim 4-voice SEM style analog synth
Oberheim OBXA
Oberheim OB8
Oberheim S.E.Ms
Oberheim Xpander
Polyfusion Modular Synth
PPG Wave 2.2
Roland Jupiter 8
Roland Jupiter 4
Roland Juno 60
Roland MKS-80 Super Jupiter
Roland MKS-70 Super JX
Roland MKS-50 Alpha Juno
Roland Modular System 700
Roland Modular System 100m
Custom Modular Synths
Roland TB-303
Roland S-760 samplers
Roland S-770 sampler
Roland JX-3P
Roland JX-10
Roland JD-800
Roland JD-990
Roland D-50
Roland JP-8000
Roland JV-90
Roland JV-1080
Roland JV-2080
Roland JP-8080
Roland JP-8000
Roland Paraphonic 505
Roland RS-09
Roland SH-2000
Roland VP-330 Vocoder
Roland XV-5080
Sequential Circuits Prophet 5
Sequential Circuits Prophet VS
Sequential Circuits Pro One
Studio Electronics Omega 8
Suzuki Omnichord
Vako Orchestron
Vox Continental
Waldorf Q�
Waldorf Wave
Waldorf Microwave
Waldorf Microwave XT
Yamaha CS-01
Yamaha CS-80
Yamaha DX-7
Yamaha TX-816
Metasynth
Rhizomatic Absynth
Logic Sculpture
Logic EXS24
Logic ES-2
Propellerheads Maelstrom
Audioease thOnk�
Audionerdz Delay Lama
Cycling '74 PGS-1�
Cycling '74 Shape Synth�
Kantos
Kyma
Native Instruments Absynth�
Native Instruments B-4
Native Instruments Pro-52
Native Instruments Reaktor�
reFX JunoX2�
reFX Vangaurd
reFX QudraSID
reFX PlasiCZ
Rumpelrausch Taips ZR1�
Steinberg Model E
Waldorf Attack
Waldorf PPG 2.V
Bitheadz Unity DS-1

NOW CLICK HERE

I ain't say it's right or wrong that people do this. I'm just pointing out the facts that YOUR WRONG.

Not that you will ever accept that. It's sort of the Diki condition. Always right even when totally wrong.

James

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 06-07-2010).]

And you can guarantee you have NO 3rd party styles (including converted styles) on your keyboards, or on your PC?

You can guarantee you have NO samples on your PC, perhaps "lent" to you by your colleagues in the recording industry? NONE whatsoever?

I really do not expect a straight answer on this, but I thought I would ask....

Oh and EVERY MP3 (or AAC file) on your PC has been paid for, or is a direct copy of a CD you actually bought?

And EVERY bit of software on your PC is all bought, none "borrowed"?