[Linuxsampler-devel] new to the list

[Michiel P. <mp...@xs...>]

Hi LS group,=20

I=B4m new to this group so let me introduce myself to you guys.

I am Michiel Post, owner of Post Musical Instrruments, a small company =
that makes sample libraries of pianos, harpsichords, organs etc. Our =
company is based in Amsterdam, since 1999. We make libraries in all =
current sampler formats (Giga, Halion, Kontakt, EXS24, Akai, SF2, =
Kurzweil etc). And we just have a Native Instruments KOMPAKT plug-in =
version of our PMI Bosendorfer 290 out. I have  multiple PC=B4s running =
audio applications (all windows machines) and a few PC=B4s for office =
tasks. Also I have a Mac G4 and a G5 Mac for specific things, mainly =
testing libraries in Logic and OSX environments.=20

I am very excited to try out Linux and LinuxSampler. I will gladly get =
involved in the developement of LinuxSampler. I am not a programmer but =
I have a long and vast experience with samplers and computers so I hope =
I can add valuable experiences and feedback.=20

I will distribute my libraries to developers of the LS app so that =
specific features can be checked by everybody (and you can make some =
music while working too!'). I have a modest Pentium4 1.8 GHz box all set =
up under Linux for tests and will add a modest Celeron and Athlon later =
if needed.=20

I=B4m thinking of writing a list of features that I think would be of =
interest for LS. We can discuss this and see what good it brings.=20

I had the pleasure to meet with Benno during the NAmm show in LA and =
must say I=B4m very excited about the LS project and the fact that this =
works under Linux, which would open up a whole range of new =
possibilities.=20

One of them is a stand alone black box that would function as a sound =
module where our sample libraries can be pre-installed. For this I will =
build a kind of prototype as soon as the software is available and =
examine what possibilities such a unit would have in the market.=20

=20

One of the things that strikes me in this project is that while you are =
alreeady talking about a roadmap for the future of LS developement you =
don=B4t seem to have a clearly defined group of people that you want to =
reach with the LS project.=20

I read that you have set a goal to get LS in Hollywood studios, to prove =
that playing large scale orchestral arrengements in a profesional =
envirnment is very well possible without using Windows or MAc OS on the =
machine.=20

Somewhere else I read that you want to get as many users away from the =
Windows platform.

Let me go into these goals from the point of a sound library developer.

The target of getting LS in Hollywood is an easy goal in my opinion. =
There are not so many of these producers and composers out there to =
begin with. Replacing a stand alone playback only machine with another =
one that does exacttly the same is an easy choice. Speciqally if the new =
one is simpler. If all 1000 composers would get a linux box and save a =
few 100 dollars on linux boxes then your goal is achieved. This =
shouldn=B4t be the ultimate goal I think. Look where this goal got =
TASCAM with GST. Their app is so complicated for a large audience (and =
expensive too) that the total world penetration is very low, maybe even =
limited to the audience of Hollywood composers and alikes, all in all =
around 10.000 worldwide. This is also my audience when I release =
giga-format libraries. One of the main advanteges of LS is that it will =
be more or less free. This makes it possible to become used by =
100.000=B4s maybe millions instead of a few 10000 people. Here  is the =
big power of the LS application in my view. Not just in atracting a few =
people in Hollywood away from Windows. The total cost of ownership =
matters less for well paid Hollywood guys than simple home users! If =
you=B4re already working in a studio replacing a few boxes and saving =
several 100=B4s is not a huge difference in their budgets. See what =
Apple=B4s G5=B4s are doing. They are expensive as hell and sell better =
than any machine they made before. Money is not so much an issue there. =
The true potential of LS for me would be to reach every Windows box user =
and being able to offer something that can do much more than any Windows =
machine offers for free. For this LS has to be delivered in a way that =
installs on all machines with relative ease.

There are some some drawbacks that your discussions so far have already =
talked about. One is the need for specific audiodrivers for all the =
different audiocards that are out there in the market.  Don=B4t forget =
that all windows users have installation  cd=B4s that come with the =
audiocard with specific installers for their win/mac audio cards. =
Installing some specific Linux driver for a card (after a distro is on =
the machine) shouldn=B4t be too problematic. Most home  users definitly =
have internet access on their music machines, hence downloading a driver =
is childplay, compared to other things they must do to keep their =
machines running.=20

The other obvious drawback is that their other application are running =
under Windows or Mac and that these apps would no longer be available =
when Linux is active on their machines. This is a problem. You see when =
somebody has developed a certain way of working, several applications =
are involved to create the final result. LS should somewhere intergrate =
in the already existing way of working.=20

If Linux could work under a Win/Mac OS shell, people could just launch =
LS from inside their existing environment. This will not work for =
obvious reasons, one is that the total CPU load of running two OS=B4s =
will be really demanding I guess. So limiting LS to standalone machines, =
clusters and networking environments makes sense in that light. But how =
doe one integrate in the existing environment?

Now about our wish to have superior Copy Protection implemented in new =
techonolgy to protect our intellectual property against piracy. Most of =
the sample library developers that I know are seriously hurt by piracy. =
Some have experienced that for every disk they seel over 20 illegal =
copies are beeing used. Some even have worst percentages. The only way =
we now protect our work is when the sounds are wrapped in a so called =
rompler (the sounds are provided in a sampler playback software app that =
limits all wavedata access and has a good challenge-response =
authorization method) like th NI KOMPAKT player that I use.=20

This limits the possibilities. The other measure that works rather well =
is watermarking. The drawback of watermarking is that the watermark =
makes it possible to prove somebody used your sound, but it=B4s =
impossible to track down each illegal copy and verybody that uses my =
sounds and start procecution of offenders.

We are thinking of a new system which would help a lot when it can be =
implemented in some way in Linux. The basic idea is to make sure that =
the datafile that we provide to be used by the sampler is locked in a =
way to one machine or one user. The best method would be to lock the =
file to the hard drive on which it is installed. Once the file is there =
it can be used. When it=B4s copied (and the Hard drive hardware  ID is =
missing) the file is messed up and encrypted. In order to do this we =
would some new method of data encryption I guess, so I drop this =
question here to see if anyone has ideas.

That=B4s it for now. I look forward hearing your thoughts.

=20

Michiel Post

=20

=20


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.553 / Virus Database: 345 - Release Date: 18-12-2003