Log in
Log in
Forgot your password ?
or
Create an account
or
Log in using a Facebook account
NotificationsNo new notification
< Back to Audiofanzine
Enlarge
Audiofanzine
Audiofanzine
(18 user review)
Products 11 11
Actu 66 66
Articles 2 2
Tutorials
Reviews 18 18
Classified Ads
Forums 260 260

Thread November 21, 2015 editorial: comments

  • 14 replies
  • 11 participants
  • 2,540 views
  • 11 followers
1 November 21, 2015 editorial: comments

The Subscription Trend Continues

If you’ve read this column regularly, you’ve probably noticed that one of my pet peeves is the trend toward the subscription model in music software. Recently there have been more developments in that area, as two major plug-in makers — Slate Digital and McDSP — launched subscription plans. Slate Digital is offering a couple of plans including the Mix/Master/FX bundle, which features all of its plug-ins for $299 a year, or $24.99 per month. Subscribers will also get any new plug-in from the company for free and free updates for its existing plugs. McDSP’s native bundle consists of its complete native product line, and is now offered for $29 per month, or $295 per year.

Thankfully, both companies still let you purchase their plug-ins. They don’t require that you get a subscription, like Microsoft and Adobe do. I’m not going to argue that the Slate and McDSP subscriptions don’t offer you a lot of value, because they do. They let you to access a lot more plug-ins for the money than you could if you bought them à la carte. But the problem is the same as in any software subscription scenario — you’re only renting the software, so if your circumstances change and you can’t pay, or if the software developer goes out of business, you’ll lose access to the software.

In the first scenario, if you knew you were going to let your subscription lapse, you could first render all the tracks on which you used the company’s plug-ins before they turned off the switch. However, if the company were to go out of business, you’d likely have no warning.

I was also thinking about what it would cost to maintain a number of software subscriptions simultaneously. If all the music software companies switched to subscription-only programs, you’d be looking at some hefty annual or monthly bills, especially if you wanted some diversity in your plug-ins.

For the sake of this example, let’s say you have Pro Tools as your DAW. Subscribing to it (at today’s rates) would cost you $299 per year or $24.92 per month. If you also had the McDSP bundle for $295 per year, or $29 per month; and the Slate Digital bundle for $299 per year or $24.99 per month; your annual music software bill would be $893 or $78.91 per month. I have a feeling that’s a lot more than a lot of recording musicians spend on software purchases. In any case, let’s hope that the software companies continue to offer the option to own, so that we have the freedom to choose.

Show first post
11
I've been a Pro Tools user for years and took advantage of the discounted price as a student. As a DAW, Pro Tools is all I know because that's what I was taught in school. Now you have to either subscribe annually or pay an insane high price for the permanent edition of the latest Pro Tools. That's why I'm still using PT11 and seriously thinking about switching over to Logic Pro. I'm only hesitating because I would hate to learn a new DAW. :o:
12
Quote:
I think the way we go on about the upgrade trail, it’s a wonder any music gets recorded at all. In addition I learnt just recently an editor of well-known recording magazine apparently is so fed up with software synth upgrades, and where there are issues with backward compatibility, that he has decided to revert back to hardware equivalents.

I hear what you're saying. The problem, of course, is that newer computers often don't run older operating systems, and older DAWs don't run on newer operating systems or computers. For my job, I have to keep up on what's new, so I can't stay on a legacy system. I suppose one could get an older computer and just use it as a dedicated DAW computer, but you'd never be able to add plug-ins or get tech support for the DAW. If you can work under those kind of limitations, great. I guess I'm too much of a gear geek to not want to use the latest and greatest. Then again, if you asked me about legacy systems right after my shiny new DAW crashed for the umpteenth time, I might have a different answer. ;)
13
Quote:
I've been a Pro Tools user for years and took advantage of the discounted price as a student. As a DAW, Pro Tools is all I know because that's what I was taught in school. Now you have to either subscribe annually or pay an insane high price for the permanent edition of the latest Pro Tools. That's why I'm still using PT11 and seriously thinking about switching over to Logic Pro. I'm only hesitating because I would hate to learn a new DAW. :o:


I went through the same thing you're going through. I was a PT11 owner and didn't want to pay that upgrade price annually. I tried several different DAWs, swearing never to pay that Pro Tools upgrade price. However, when Avid subsequently offered the $99 upgrade to PT12 (same as the $199 one minus the free tech support), I relented, because I really missed some of Pro Tools' features. I think $99 per year isn't an excessive amount to spend. On most DAWs, one has to upgrade every couple of years, and that's usually in the $150 to $200 range, so the difference isn't all that big.

In any case, I hope you're able to find a DAW that you like to replace PT.
14
Hi Mike,
I should have clarified in my above comments that I wasn’t pacifically referring to you, as I know it’s your remit to inform folks of new gear. From my perspective I merely was trying to encourage the younger generation to stick and learn their craft with what they have, and stop throwing good money away on chasing shadows…

For instance a few months ago I was saddened to learn a young engineer blowing 150 bucks on a Tape Machine plugin, that sounded nothing more than a glorified tone control. Since I cut my teeth on analogue tape I had no problem re-creating the same type of characteristics of the above plugin using standard Eq. That said, it still did NOT sound like tape!

Before folks decide to invest in analogue plugins of this nature, they need to be aware to accurately capture the characteristics of an analogue tape machine; the latter needs to coalesce with a good quality analogue-mixing desk to create the kind of sonic quality heard on your favorite records of times gone by.

Secondly, software designers who produce these simulations seem to be ignoring the fact the longer tape machines remain switched on, the more the sound can change over a period of time… Big Difference!!!

With reference to new gadgets, you brought a smile to my face when you mentioned about the “Latest & Greatest” gear. You reminded me when I was a younger man, possibly your age, when I too was always pursuing new gadgets, and making excuses that I had to upgrade to the latest gear, which unfortunately not only distracted me from perfecting my art, but wasted a lot of money in the process.

For example after spending a small fortune on both hardware and reverb plugins, I finally found an old 16bit reverb plugin released in the nineties, that doesn’t get in the way of the music. I just wished I had discovered it before I spent all that money unwisely.

I appreciate your concerns about using old systems, but in reference to the above plugin, I was delighted to discover by using a wrapper, I could still use my beloved Reverb plugin on both 32 and 64bit DAW’s, not forgetting the latest Operating systems. I even got a request from someone abroad who wanted his vocals and guitar treated with the above reverb … not bad for a seventeen-year-old plugin :)

Talk care.
15
Quote:
Secondly, software designers who produce these simulations seem to be ignoring the fact the longer tape machines remain switched on, the more the sound can change over a period of time… Big Difference!!!

Good point. :bravo: Most emulations give you a "snapshot in time" from a piece of hardware, but aren't able to reproduce fluctuations in performance that happen in real units.