“Spend you money with companies that care about you. Those that don’t, kick them to the kerb.”
This is why I dumped Cubase, even though they back-pedalled rather quickly too. Also why I’m dumping everthing inMusic. They dont even have the sense to back-pedal.
Takes you quite a long time to do it though, doesn’t it? You’ve been saying for I don’t know how long you’re abandoning all things InMusic, disgusted as you seem to be with their policies and their software, yet here you still are, venting the same old rant over and over again, month after month. It’s getting well past tedious by now, if you don’t mind me saying so.
InMusic is InMusic. That’s one thing. Way of the world, I suppose. BFD3 is a whole other thing though — great (if imperfect) software worked on by, as far as I can tell, some great people — and that is why we’re here.
Why you’re still here, I really don’t know.
He’s a funny dude. They kicked him out of the Pro Tools forum (DUC) because of his strong opinions on Avid’s business practices. In regards to Waves, he said he uses a couple of their plugins on his voice whilst recording his videos. He should stick to his guns and just dump them altogether.
I know Waves are huge, but I think this blunder may hurt them in the long run. Even with them reversing course a bit, most voices are still saying they’re done with them. They crossed the line. As the whole thing was unfolding, Solid State Logic swooped in to try and take advantage of Waves’ mistake. Previously, some of their plugins were only available through their subscription model, but now all of their plugins can be purchased as a perpetual license, subscription or even rent-to-own.
I’ve got a handful or so of Waves’ plugins that I use in every session. I’m on older hardware, so I’ve never had a need to pay for their WUP scam. If Waves really wanted to make amends, they would just get rid of charging to update their plugins altogether. How freaking ridiculous is that? McDSP is another who started charging for updates. It’s like they want to penalize the end-user, just because Apple likes to release new OS’s annually?
I’m still here because even at my silly low prices, no-one has bought all the BFD stuff. As soon as it’s all gone I’ll have inMusic delete my account which I’m sure will please you and your fellow fanboys. If inMusic had done the right thing I would have been gone months ago.
That kind of weak acceptance is why companies like inMusic get away with it. Look at how Cubase and Waves have both had the go back on their subsciption models due to customer backlash. That’s what can be achieved when you don’t say, “I don’t like it, but I guess I’ll have to live with it.”
If I didn’t own all of those expansions already, I would have taken them all for the prices you are selling them at, total bargain, I guess that makes me a fan of BFD3 for sure, but not one of what’s going on with the licensing, there is a difference.
It’s not cool to see people so disappointed and wanting to leave, at all.
It’s not weak acceptance, Anthony, it’s wise acceptance. (If you have to use Adobe to make some of your living, as I do, you quickly learn a thing or two about wise acceptance.) My desire and need to make music is much greater than my loathing for the corporate inferno that, like an insidious disease, is infesting our world.
The biggest problem I have with your endless fulminations is that, in your anger (which, in essence, I fully sympathize with), you keep targetting BFD and InMusic as if they’re one and the same evil. I think that’s wrong and highly unfair. To me, BFD, like so many exciting and creative smaller enterprises, got eaten up up by the huge corporate machinery that rules our world. But it’s very much NOT the same thing. You also can’t go attacking, say, TC Electronic for all the well-dressed, politely formulated but insulting and infuriating non-service that MusicTribe (which owns TC) treats its customers to. BFD, as I see it, is a bit like all those other smaller companies with great ideas that got eaten up by Apple and/or Microsoft. BFD is actually somewhat fortunate in that it can, to a degree, still continue doing its thing, whereas most smaller companies that are swallowed by the big fish are usually never heard from again.
I might be wrong, but it wouldn’t surprise me if a considerable number of InMusic’s personnel and board of directors don’t even know what BFD is, let alone than any one of them has ever worked with it. They just happen to own it. Like they own so many things. As I said: way of the world.
Depressing? Yes, a bit. But again: I wanna make music. And in BFD I have found a brilliant, if imperfect, tool to make music with. I hope, with every fibre of my being, that the dedicated and passionate people behind BFD are somehow allowed — in the middle of whatever corporate dynamic they must seek to survive — to continue work and development on what I consider, by some margin, the best solution for virtual drums hitherto created. BFD, when at its best — granted, it can take some doing to make it give its best — is, in my opinion, without competition.
Thank you for your considered response. I naturally don’t agree with a lot of what you wrote (except I’m sure you’re right in inMusic employees not even knowing what BFD is), but I won’t dissect it point-by-point. All I’ll say is if users hadn’t complained about the 30-day licence refresh it would have stayed at 30-days.
For me 90-days is still ridiculous for a perpetual licence, so that’s why I and others carried on complaining in the vain hope that inMusic would listen. As I have come to realise what type of corporation inMusic are, I realise you might as well spit in the wind.
I would just like to point out that outside this forum (in other forums and the real world - remember that place?) I’m not as curmudgeonly as I appear here. If I thought BFD (the idea) was crap I would have dumped it before now. Sadly BFD (the program) is not going in a direction I want to follow - I was an early adopter with BFD1.
But like Cubase and Waves found out, in 2023 there is plenty of competition, and unfortunately BFD is not coming from a place even close to market dominance. In fact most people don’t even mention it when asked to compile a list of drum programs in other music forums, so you may feel BFD is without competition, but the truth is outside of this forum barely anyone even knows about BFD anymore, the non-competition are beating BFD hands-down and what inMusic are doing is not going to lead it to a place of dominance.
Anyway, enough from me.
All points taken, but (and it’s only my opinion) none of the others out there, even their latest efforts, come close to what BFD offers in the way of everything really, sound, control etc etc, maybe only their licensing system is better. They really do sound like fake drums to me, all of them.
To be honest I process drums to buggery and mix with drum machines, so the raw recordings idea isn’t that big a selling point to me anymore - I’m no drummer - and I think many other people are likewise. The problem is as soon as people find out about the licensing system, many who are maybe less fussy about the sound and just want to get on with making music without the worry of the software perhaps not working in 90 days will just cross BFD off their list (if it even made the list in the first place).
InMusic need to be a a bit more honest on their website too as BFD still doesn’t mention the 90-day subscription requirement except in some hard to find small print. It should be right there in the ‘system requirements’. If they’re confident in their system they should have the balls to put it up there.
Totally agree with that. I like to sit and tweak the f out of the drums, it’s very enjoyable to me, I’m a bit of an all rounder when it comes to playing instruments, my main thing is guitar, but as a teen I started out as a drummer and played semi-professionally in cover and original setups for around 5 years, before I moved over to guitar.
I’m not Neal Peart (who is lol) but I can keep a solid beat good enough to make it sound acceptable, BFD3 is an absolute god send in my opinion for having complete creative control over the entire drum set up, it’s incredible, when I first discovered it (v1) I was in denial about how cool it was, I harp on about how nothing comes close, I stand by that. I do agree there are other awesome ones out there too, I even have almost all of them, I like to f around and compare between them all, I even have the shittiest ones you can imagine. I know not everybody wants to sit through these processes and most just want simple easy out of the box make me sound good (that’s debatable) drum software, for me BFD3 does that and then 50 times more. It puts me in the drummers seat, the producer and the engineers seat at at once. I love that.
I totally agree. Even if it isn’t in the system requirements section, you shouldn’t have to dig through the FAQ to find it. It’s a very important, almost hidden detail. But I think we can deduce why that’s the case.
It states “Internet connection required”. It should say “Internet connection required (put two and two together)”
How about, Internet connection required every 90 days for re-authorization. Because an internet connection isn’t actually “required” to use BFD3, once it’s been authorized.
I wasn’t entirely serious, but the joke didn’t come out very good either.
It’s true that you don’t need internet for 90 days after you have authorized. But do you see how ugly it is to formulate this into BFD’s requirements? Instead, “Internet Connection” is there. Because, as long as you are online, you probably won’t feel a thing. (Which was a big deal a year ago, even permanently online machines were hit by occasional licensing tantrums.)
We already know all that, no point in discussing this between us.
The point is, and a solution is missing here, for the people that need to work offline.
Pianoteq does offline. You authorize up to three machines. If you deathorize a machine to free up a seat, that machine can never be authorized again. (Without reaching for support etc etc)
Even Steinberg had a similar idea before their 180. Choose to either be permanently online and be able to use the software on up to 3 machines, or to be given a permanent offline license for just a single machine.
I’m mostly online, so no grief for me anymore. But there are people who consider not being always online top priority. Not going to judge them, but hey, these people are not coming over, no matter how great the product is.
And on topic, I wouldn’t subscribe to waves. I’ve got just two plugins in all. There’s no way I’m paying 15 € each time I feel like tweaking some obscure project of mine from way back…
This whole subscription business is based on a big assumption. That your software is a suite, self-contained, that allows the user to create a finished product. Well. This can hold true for Adobe, I don’t think a professional minds paying for a subscription. But for plug-ins? Dude, I like 5 out of your 300 plugs, I will buy them, ok? I don’t want the rest. And this goes for all of those companies. I’ll grab an eq from here, a compressor from there, a filter from elsewhere. My DAW already has its own plugins, and they work fine, really. It’s just some color I’m after, not a workbench upon which all my work will be done. So, why are you pressuring me into buying into a gargantuan collection of stuff I will not use, with the excuse that “it’s cheap for what it offers”? I want to give you 100 €, buy one or two things and then forget about it and just use them. Not give you 15 each month and be left with crap in the end, when I can’t afford it anymore.
Again, different people have different needs. They (waves) could have said “You know what Georgie, we’re seeing that you have 25 plugins from us, and that you’re always updating them. Why don’t you consider giving our subscription a go? You’ll be saving money in the end.” They chose to say: “All of you bums that have 1 or 2 plug-ins that haven’t even benn updated in years, yes you, shoo! Either pay 15 € a month, or be gone. Your broke-ass is tiring us out.” What did they expect would happen then? Even the most gentle of people apologized, grabbed their hats and said goodbye.
Every manufacturer these days has internet requirement unless they provide a boxed version, so having internet requirement doesnt cover it I’m afraid. Usually you only need the internet to download and licence it once.
Just put “90-day internet subscription required (no additonal fees)” and that covers the bare bones. You can then asterix off to a lengthier explanation. See, wasnt so difficult to ‘formulate’.
I got you, I was just adding my serious take and simple solution.
I mean, by design you’re supposed to be able to work offline, but I’ve been deauthorized a bunch of times, even just the other day and with a solid internet connection. So, it’s not working as intended and advertising it as such is kind of a lie.
I’m not sure I’d be down with this idea. There are plenty of companies like Overloud and Melodyne that let you authorize/deauthorize your machine ID’s with no limitation via a web browser. This is the way.
No, but it’s not difficult to be put-off by reading it either.
That’s kind of the idea.