I cant believe live that stock pictureJiggeryPokery wrote: ↑28 Jun 2019
So, having watched the video above, you can clearly see from it they're ripped samples: because no-one would sample a stretched sample note by note like that, unless they were doing this for the first time (which puts a big fucking dent in their "professional" claims), and then the only way that happens is by setting their auto-ripper on autopilot to sample every note while they go off to rip pictures off Google. This is isn't brain surgery. The main image is easily reverse-searchable, it's hhttps://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/photo/viol ... /153502862. The "team" photos look to be stock too. You'd think, given they are supposed to have run a studio, they could have at least taken one photo of their top class recording session .
(Disclosure: I bought Euphonics from the Propshop too. I used it, I didn't hate it at the time, but yeah, I don't believe for one second it's kosher)
Zampled gone down
That's an interesting one. I wonder if you can still download the copyright infringing ReFills from Propellerheads servers if you bought them? Or if they've vanished entirely but without any recompense for those who thought they were legitimate given they could be bought direct from the Props shop...
Anyone who bought them care to chimeMagnus wrote: ↑01 Jul 2019That's an interesting one. I wonder if you can still download the copyright infringing ReFills from Propellerheads servers if you bought them? Or if they've vanished entirely but without any recompense for those who thought they were legitimate given they could be bought direct from the Props shop...
In ?
I'm guessing they haven't removed them from people's accounts. Softphonics Factory Bank is still there available for download on my account anyway (although it was free. The picture has also been replaced with the red marker).sleep1979 wrote: ↑01 Jul 2019Anyone who bought them care to chimeMagnus wrote: ↑01 Jul 2019
That's an interesting one. I wonder if you can still download the copyright infringing ReFills from Propellerheads servers if you bought them? Or if they've vanished entirely but without any recompense for those who thought they were legitimate given they could be bought direct from the Props shop...
In ?
🗲 2ॐ ᛉ
I suppose that gets around having to provide any refunds!
Shame this kind of stuff is able to happen right under the Propellerheads' noses (and in a way that ends up looking like these illegitimate sample libraries actually have their endorsement!)
- esselfortium
- Posts: 1456
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
- Contact:
Softphonics is still credited for 78 patches from the new soundbank that showed up in Reason 9, speaking of which.
They're all combinators almost entirely made up of preexisting factory and orkester patches with some added reverb and audiomatic, and a "By Andrew Skelton" patch slapped on the top, because even here, Softphonics apparently still couldn't be bothered to do much more than put his name on repackagings of other people's work.
Amusingly (or at least it would be amusing if this wasn't official content still included with Reason), many of the Softphonics combis included with Reason have layered both the standard and lite versions of the same orkester instrument together, attempting to make them sound thicker but just causing phasing problems instead. It would probably be a good idea for Propellerhead to replace these with something less broken and not associated with a known con artist.
They're all combinators almost entirely made up of preexisting factory and orkester patches with some added reverb and audiomatic, and a "By Andrew Skelton" patch slapped on the top, because even here, Softphonics apparently still couldn't be bothered to do much more than put his name on repackagings of other people's work.
Amusingly (or at least it would be amusing if this wasn't official content still included with Reason), many of the Softphonics combis included with Reason have layered both the standard and lite versions of the same orkester instrument together, attempting to make them sound thicker but just causing phasing problems instead. It would probably be a good idea for Propellerhead to replace these with something less broken and not associated with a known con artist.
Sarah Mancuso
My music: Future Human
My music: Future Human
yeah ive noticed that its weird how they haven't updated them yetesselfortium wrote: ↑02 Jul 2019Softphonics is still credited for 78 patches from the new soundbank that showed up in Reason 9, speaking of which.
They're all combinators almost entirely made up of preexisting factory and orkester patches with some added reverb and audiomatic, and a "By Andrew Skelton" patch slapped on the top, because even here, Softphonics apparently still couldn't be bothered to do much more than put his name on repackagings of other people's work.
Amusingly (or at least it would be amusing if this wasn't official content still included with Reason), many of the Softphonics combis included with Reason have layered both the standard and lite versions of the same orkester instrument together, attempting to make them sound thicker but just causing phasing problems instead. It would probably be a good idea for Propellerhead to replace these with something less broken and not associated with a known con artist.
Oh dear, that's not good at all...sleep1979 wrote: ↑02 Jul 2019yeah ive noticed that its weird how they haven't updated them yetesselfortium wrote: ↑02 Jul 2019Softphonics is still credited for 78 patches from the new soundbank that showed up in Reason 9, speaking of which.
They're all combinators almost entirely made up of preexisting factory and orkester patches with some added reverb and audiomatic, and a "By Andrew Skelton" patch slapped on the top, because even here, Softphonics apparently still couldn't be bothered to do much more than put his name on repackagings of other people's work.
Amusingly (or at least it would be amusing if this wasn't official content still included with Reason), many of the Softphonics combis included with Reason have layered both the standard and lite versions of the same orkester instrument together, attempting to make them sound thicker but just causing phasing problems instead. It would probably be a good idea for Propellerhead to replace these with something less broken and not associated with a known con artist.
- esselfortium
- Posts: 1456
- Joined: 15 Jan 2015
- Contact:
Setting aside all the other reasons why that's not what happened, not a single one of those "volunteers" wanted to be credited anywhere for their countless hours of unpaid labor...?
Sarah Mancuso
My music: Future Human
My music: Future Human
It amazes me why propellerhead wouldn’t question this from softphonics and zampled tbh just anyone could roll up ,
Why were at it i know its legit but ive always wondered where was orkestor recorded
Why were at it i know its legit but ive always wondered where was orkestor recorded
This thread has convinced me so throughly that I have now uninstalled Zampled from my computer. It's feels like a knock-off product even if it comes to pass that it somehow isn't. I believe Propellerhead should be investigating it either way to let us know. From here on in I'm only using StringWERK for my string parts as that is clearly legitimate; and of a very high professional quality.esselfortium wrote: ↑06 Jul 2019Setting aside all the other reasons why that's not what happened, not a single one of those "volunteers" wanted to be credited anywhere for their countless hours of unpaid labor...?
- Boombastix
- Competition Winner
- Posts: 1929
- Joined: 18 May 2018
- Location: Bay Area, CA
I think it is because copyright infringement became a modus operandi many years ago (BIIB, eLab, were early in selling sample CDs in the 90's.), and nobody really wants to open this can of worms. Anyone seen a DAW factory lib, refill, or a sample pack with a copyrighted 909 open hi hat sample? Yeah, there you have it, it is all over the place. Question is if you have sold the 909 hihat, then where do you draw the line. It's like a kid stealing a pack of gum from 7/11, is it OK? But what about a bank robbery? When do you cross the line for what is OK, and do you want to pursue infringers when you have questionable content yourself? Or maybe a better example is, is it OK to roll a stop sign going 5mph? It is technically illegal, but nearly everyone seems OK with it, but rolling at 25mph is both illegal and not OK (by most standards), so where do you draw the line?
Different levels, steal one string sample to put out a Grain refill (not saying there is one, just an example) is that the same as the 909 hihat, or is it worse? What about more strings that make up a patch, again, where to draw the line?
Nobody has perfect answers I believe, but it has become more of a current topic now with Splice/Sounds.com/Loopmaster. There has already been pulls of clearly ripped content. And a large beat maker website now requires declaration of any sampled content for submitted beats.
But humans have been stealing from each other since the dawn of humanity, so...
10% off at Waves with link: https://www.waves.com/r/6gh2b0
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.
Disclaimer - I get 10% as well.
I used to be very precise with this stuff. Any songs I made had an accompanying text file listing every single sample, sound and library used. I even used to store a copy of the licenses with each song. But as I've got older I've become more relaxed about this stuff. I make music for me, occasionally sharing it with mates or online but I have no ambition to make any money from music. I'm 99% legal with software and mostly legitimate with samples and sounds but I don't stress it and I no longer keep any records.
If it sounds good I use it.
And in reality no-one is going to be able to track individual instrument sounds back to their source. If you use a string sound from a legitimately purchased RE/Library that turns out to have been nicked from another library then it is not going to be identifiable by the time it is processed, eq'd, mixed and mastered. Loops probably are identifiable unless they are really mashed-up but as end users we can't be expected to check the legitimacy of a loop or sample beyond the supplier we bought it from. "Hello, please can I speak to the boss of the London Symphony Orchestra. I need to check some samples with him"...
If it sounds good I use it.
And in reality no-one is going to be able to track individual instrument sounds back to their source. If you use a string sound from a legitimately purchased RE/Library that turns out to have been nicked from another library then it is not going to be identifiable by the time it is processed, eq'd, mixed and mastered. Loops probably are identifiable unless they are really mashed-up but as end users we can't be expected to check the legitimacy of a loop or sample beyond the supplier we bought it from. "Hello, please can I speak to the boss of the London Symphony Orchestra. I need to check some samples with him"...
Boingy i think your right and to be honestboingy wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019I used to be very precise with this stuff. Any songs I made had an accompanying text file listing every single sample, sound and library used. I even used to store a copy of the licenses with each song. But as I've got older I've become more relaxed about this stuff. I make music for me, occasionally sharing it with mates or online but I have no ambition to make any money from music. I'm 99% legal with software and mostly legitimate with samples and sounds but I don't stress it and I no longer keep any records.
If it sounds good I use it.
And in reality no-one is going to be able to track individual instrument sounds back to their source. If you use a string sound from a legitimately purchased RE/Library that turns out to have been nicked from another library then it is not going to be identifiable by the time it is processed, eq'd, mixed and mastered. Loops probably are identifiable unless they are really mashed-up but as end users we can't be expected to check the legitimacy of a loop or sample beyond the supplier we bought it from. "Hello, please can I speak to the boss of the London Symphony Orchestra. I need to check some samples with him"...
If you made a complete album with cracked software , do you think if you suddenly became as big as avicii for example was , do you think there gonna make
You go back and do it with all legit software no of course not
But a lot of people here want to own there software and once you become someone that likes to own there stuff , using cracked stuff starts to feel wrong
So there should be a choice,
people making money off stuff we could freely download if we wanted to is bullshit really ,
Tbh with you i sometimes download stuff to try if there is no demo and i delete it if i want to buy it , with zampled i was thinking of getting then because they was so cheap and if i had them now and i was using then and i knew that it would feel wrong because , i no longer crack i like owning stuff ,
I did buy sphere from softphonics from amazon and they sent it on a home made cd with a basic printer printed cover
And that refill had issues clicking in some of the patches , and i’d deleted it once i knew , i didnt really use it anyway , only wanted it for strings
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
what are the facts?
Dunno its all theory and I'm not as clever as esselfortium but she seems to pose a clever argument ,
All the evidence presented above points towards Zampled Euphonic Strings being another Softphonics style debacle. A product sold as legitimate effort. With the website making out that the developers themselves undertook the effort to sample all the performances and instruments themselves, when it transpires that the product was actually created dishonestly. It is simply a re-sampling of other company's work, repackaged and then marketing/advertised in a way that attempts to mask its true nature.
I wasn't sure before but based on the case made by esselfortium; I am now 100% convinced this is true.
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
Magnus wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019All the evidence presented above points towards Zampled Euphonic Strings being another Softphonics style debacle. A product sold as legitimate effort. With the website making out that the developers themselves undertook the effort to sample all the performances and instruments themselves, when it transpires that the product was actually created dishonestly. It is simply a re-sampling of other company's work, repackaged and then marketing/advertised in a way that attempts to mask its true nature.
I wasn't sure before but based on the case made by esselfortium; I am now 100% convinced this is true.
I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
I guess the same is true for Zampled Euphonic Strings. If there would be a claim it would be taken offline.
I am not defending these companies but I know that speculation on this can result in major errors. I am only interested in the truth, the facts.
In the case of softphonics someone compared the library sound by sound and then he disappeared how much more facts do u need , he would never admit it would he , zampled could be anyone , there are some refill company's who i trust 100% like pinknoise studio who you have or work for , we know andras is in the studio painstakingly doing his thing , but there are of refill makers now I wouldn’t trust with a bargepole ,Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019Magnus wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019
All the evidence presented above points towards Zampled Euphonic Strings being another Softphonics style debacle. A product sold as legitimate effort. With the website making out that the developers themselves undertook the effort to sample all the performances and instruments themselves, when it transpires that the product was actually created dishonestly. It is simply a re-sampling of other company's work, repackaged and then marketing/advertised in a way that attempts to mask its true nature.
I wasn't sure before but based on the case made by esselfortium; I am now 100% convinced this is true.
I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
I guess the same is true for Zampled Euphonic Strings. If there would be a claim it would be taken offline.
I am not defending these companies but I know that speculation on this can result in major errors. I am only interested in the truth, the facts.
1:i dunno whos making the things
Names bio etc .
2: theres no pictures and proof of whats gone into them
I mean i dunno who actually found softphonics out but if they never he would probably still be in this forum releasing new products I’m sure
If other refills makers haven't been found out
they will probably still sit pretty and still keep earning a few quid from it until they get found out which could probably be never
- Marco Raaphorst
- Posts: 2504
- Joined: 22 Jan 2015
- Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
- Contact:
His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc.sleep1979 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019In the case of softphonics someone compared the library sound by sound and then he disappeared how much more facts do u need , he would never admit it would he , zampled could be anyone , there are some refill company's who i trust 100% like pinknoise studio who you have or work for , we know andras is in the studio painstakingly doing his thing , but there are of refill makers now I wouldn’t trust with a bargepole ,Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019
I thought the Propellerhead has never said there was a copyright claim concerning Softphonics.
I guess the same is true for Zampled Euphonic Strings. If there would be a claim it would be taken offline.
I am not defending these companies but I know that speculation on this can result in major errors. I am only interested in the truth, the facts.
1:i dunno whos making the things
Names bio etc .
2: theres no pictures and proof of whats gone into them
I mean i dunno who actually found softphonics out but if they never he would probably still be in this forum releasing new products I’m sure
If other refills makers haven't been found out
they will probably still sit pretty and still keep earning a few quid from it until they get found out which could probably be never
I get that its hard must take hours weeks and months years to makeMarco Raaphorst wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc.sleep1979 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019
In the case of softphonics someone compared the library sound by sound and then he disappeared how much more facts do u need , he would never admit it would he , zampled could be anyone , there are some refill company's who i trust 100% like pinknoise studio who you have or work for , we know andras is in the studio painstakingly doing his thing , but there are of refill makers now I wouldn’t trust with a bargepole ,
1:i dunno whos making the things
Names bio etc .
2: theres no pictures and proof of whats gone into them
I mean i dunno who actually found softphonics out but if they never he would probably still be in this forum releasing new products I’m sure
If other refills makers haven't been found out
they will probably still sit pretty and still keep earning a few quid from it until they get found out which could probably be never
I see bitword gave up for maybe some reasons like that ,
But andrew didnt defend himself man he just went
Your a nice guy marco i am too but your probably being too nice to him tbh believing in him still ,
I probably think in real life maybe he aint that much of a bad guy to his family he's just a survivor making some money for his fam , but then probably so are a lot of people here
So he was basically stealing from the rich and selling to the poor ( or average people that have bills to pay and dont have a lot of money )
He wasn’t exactly robin hood )
The Softphonics thing was bad though; at the exact moment he got rumbled he then claimed he was closing down his company and couldn't work any more due to poor health (probably brought on by being discovered for being a scam artist!). Given he lied about the authenticity of his products there's every chance he lied about his health as well.Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019His disappearance can also be based on other reasons. I have seen many developers give up because of all sorts of reasons, illness, lack of money, tiredness etc.sleep1979 wrote: ↑08 Jul 2019
In the case of softphonics someone compared the library sound by sound and then he disappeared how much more facts do u need , he would never admit it would he , zampled could be anyone , there are some refill company's who i trust 100% like pinknoise studio who you have or work for , we know andras is in the studio painstakingly doing his thing , but there are of refill makers now I wouldn’t trust with a bargepole ,
1:i dunno whos making the things
Names bio etc .
2: theres no pictures and proof of whats gone into them
I mean i dunno who actually found softphonics out but if they never he would probably still be in this forum releasing new products I’m sure
If other refills makers haven't been found out
they will probably still sit pretty and still keep earning a few quid from it until they get found out which could probably be never
As stated above, if he'd never got discovered he'd probably still be busy sampling Native Instruments products and releasing them as ReFills under his own branding.
I spent hours making patches for him I will never be able to use for collosus
https://soundcloud.com/moneykube-qube/s ... d-playlist
Proud Member Of The Awesome League Of Perpetuals
Proud Member Of The Awesome League Of Perpetuals
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests