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"?

guys:
did you read my post too????????