Jump to content

Thing you dont understand about music companies


Recommended Posts

  • Members

here I go:

 

1. Why the hell alesis didnt release an editor for the micron??? it's one know interface is the biggest pain in the ass, and it's sound is heaven :( I dont think they did all those beautiful presets on the keyboard itself. They would sell a ton of them.

 

2.. Why companies keep releasing USB 1 interfaces... wont they be obsolote any time soon?

 

3. How is that companies like yamaha can make a 60% price drop in one of their interfaces?

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

1) Why does Yamaha make the best keyboards in the world (Yamaha Tyros) but forget to add enter + numeric buttons on the user interface?

 

2) Why does RME release an almost perfect product in the RME Fireface 800 and leave the dynamic range of the A/D on only 109 dB?

 

3) Why are there so many companies creating amp simulation units with harsh digital sound?

 

4) Why is there so many virtual instrument manufacturers that lie about the real computer performance needed to run them smoothly in an avarage recording environment?

 

5) Why can't companies put the starting price on the unit in the advertisement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by geek_usa

I got one...


Why do they charge so high for a stupid artist series guitar when it's just a simple rendition of a guitar they have for less than half the price?!

 

Because 1) the artist royalty has to be paid in order to be able to use "their name" on a product, therefore the cost to the manufacturer goes up; 2), they are somewhat changed models insofar as cosmetics and features, and such models have limited production numbers compared to the "regular" models, which also increases per unit cost and 3) maybe because of the added desireability to some customers, companies feel they can make a bit more profit on such models. At least those are my guesses. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one of my personal pet peeves:

 

Why do manufacturers fail to put a BNC word clock I/O on some products? IMO, ANY product that has digital I/O connections should have BNC word clock I/O to facilitate digital interconnection with a master word clock for the entire setup. Leaving them off is unacceptable in this day and age. :mad:

 

IMO. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe

Here's one of my personal pet peeves:


Why do manufacturers fail to put a BNC word clock I/O on some products? IMO, ANY product that has digital I/O connections should have BNC word clock I/O to facilitate digital interconnection with a master word clock for the entire setup. Leaving them off is unacceptable in this day and age.
:mad:

IMO.
:)

 

I agree

 

One more:

 

Why do they make gear whose psu is sold separatly? You cant buy it from any one else, and you HAVE to buy if you want to use your purchased gear.:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

3) Why are there so many companies creating amp simulation units with harsh digital sound?


4) Why is there so many virtual instrument manufacturers that lie about the real computer performance needed to run them smoothly in an avarage recording environment?

 

 

You read my mind.

 

Here's my answer for 4). Few people have a computer that can run large sample libraries well, which means limited sales. However, if the requirements are underspecified, then more people will buy the library. If they can't run it, they are likely to upgrade their computer, since they already have the library. If they knew the actual requirements, they wouldn't buy the library or the new computer.

 

I have noticed though that a lot of companies actually do update the requirements, probably due to complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't understand software companies expecting their potential buyers to tolerate challenge/response or any system other than a registration key.

 

I can't understand the mentality. They should KNOW by now that this is a challenge to crackers, and ensures that their product WILL be cracked. (Crackers enjoy the challenge - no challenge, not worth their time).

 

Those who want to buy software legally will do so. Just not from them. Those who want to steal their software will do so. Probably from them.

 

Punish the good so the bad will behave? I don't think so. Screw them - there is almost always alternatives from smarter vendors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) Why does RME release an almost perfect product in the RME Fireface 800 and leave the dynamic range of the A/D on only 109 dB?

 

Let's be fair here...

 

While in theory, 24 bit recording is capable of a 144 dB dynamic range, no one has a converter product on the market that comes anywhere near to that ideal spec. And for a variety of technical reasons, you're not likely to see one being released any time soon either.

 

109 dB is actually pretty darned respectable. And unless you're extremely exceptional and have a very quiet studio, that interface is the least of your noise floor issues. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

Originally posted by geek_usa

I got one...


Why do they charge so high for a stupid artist series guitar when it's just a simple rendition of a guitar they have for less than half the price?!

 

 

"The higher we raise the price, the more guitars we sell."

 

- Henry J., President of Gibson, in the Wall Street Journal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe

109 dB is actually pretty darned respectable. And unless you're extremely exceptional and have a very quiet studio, that interface is the least of your noise floor issues.
;)

 

And by the time the "mastering" is done, you'll only need the top 1dB anyway. Heck with the other 108...

 

MG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe

2) Why does RME release an almost perfect product in the RME Fireface 800 and leave the dynamic range of the A/D on only 109 dB?


Let's be fair here...


While in theory, 24 bit recording is capable of a 144 dB dynamic range, no one has a converter product on the market that comes anywhere near to that ideal spec. And for a variety of technical reasons, you're not likely to see one being released any time soon either.


109 dB is actually pretty darned respectable. And unless you're extremely exceptional and have a very quiet studio, that interface is the least of your noise floor issues.
;)

 

I can see your point, however to be honest I believe it makes every difference in the world to have high dynamic range in the A/D converter and to have an unsmeared stereo spectrum. If the crystal clock is jittery, and according to the "specialists" I've been discussing with it very well might be rather jittery, then this could cause maybe a 10 dB drop in dynamic range! (typical worst case scenario). So lets say a Rosetta 200, that is capable of 115 dB dynamic range, has a much more stable crystal reference clock and high quality dithering, I think it's rather obvious that the difference will be rather noticable in the end with a maybe 15 dB dynamic range difference in the 16-bit version (due to the difference in the dithering quality): more focused and edged sounds, less grain in the image and a better stereo image and a much better 16-bit final result.You actually don't have to always raise the volume in order to hear tracks clearly then. (which is often the case with the Fireface and never the case when I do analog MIDI sequencing with a few tracks...) So what I seem to end up with is a rather blurry kind of sound image. I know the quality of the converter is not the best since I am used to analog tape recording on a 50 euro tape recorder and the sound picture is almost better...! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...