Do you pay for your software?

How much do you love this stuff?

Do you pay for your [music] software?

I don't use software.
Total votes: 40
User avatar
Team Drizzy
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:40 am
Instruments: Hammond, guitar, bass
Recording Method: Pro Tools 12.5, NI Komplete Ultimate 10
Location: Houston, TX

Post by Sober » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:03 pm

I pay for all the software I use.

B4II, Cubase SX3, Ozone 3, Guitar Rig II, Amplitube, Waves gold package...

All of it. I absolutely paid for it.

I steal all of my hardware, though.
Propaganda artist.
User avatar
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 9:03 pm
Location: California

Post by Elias_Aquarius » Wed May 23, 2007 7:29 pm

I try to buy, both music and software, especially when it comes to artists and/or programs that I admire. But I'm not above searching for a song on audio search, since it's really the one song I'm after. If I hear more from an artist and like it, I buy the CD.
Mr. T says: Eat your school, don't do milk, and go to drugs.
User avatar
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:54 am
Instruments: none
Recording Method: LMMS and Audacity
Submitting as: Mr. Beany's Bitty Band; "Mr. Beany, <something-somethings>"
Location: Indiana, USA (where "losingest" is a word)

Re: Do you pay for your software?

Post by mrbeany » Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:26 am

I do not pay for my software.

I'm Open Source all the way.

I have to use Open Source software if I want to instill good values in my children.

... you know, good Open Source values...
User avatar
Posts: 9496
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:56 am
Instruments: sometimes
Recording Method: Logic Pro X
Submitting as: Sockpuppet
Location: The Plaidlands (also, Seattle)

Re: Do you pay for your software?

Post by fluffy » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:33 am

While Open Source has certainly been beneficial, it seems like there's a limit to how good OSS can get when it comes to non-essential apps. I personally use a mixture of OSS and commercial software, and when it comes to art and music, the commercial stuff just blows the OSS stuff away.

More and more OSS is being developed by companies who have an interest in improving the OSS to professional levels, but unfortunately that also rather self-selects which sorts of things get improved. It's highly beneficial to Internet companies to help improve Apache. It's not so beneficial for, say, Adobe to help improve GIMP. (That said I am aware of how various film studios have helped to improve CinePaint or whatever the deep-color fork of GIMP is called these days, but the film production world has a very different set of needs from the graphic design world.)

I think the main difference is one of culture. The creative-tool makers see the tools themselves as the product, and a lot of that is probably because the creative tools are digital replacements for physical tools, which have an intrinsic value. And, since the tools themselves are generally the smallest expense for any of the big players in the creative production service industry, there's no real incentive for them to help improve the OSS tools.

I think that eventually, certain OSS projects will reach a state where they're almost good enough that the professionals start taking interest in improving them further, but that's probably a long ways off for music. Audio programming is a pretty dang specialized field and people in a specialized field tend not to work for free.
Post Reply