The Cracks/ Piracy debate.. My take/ change!

[Melb_shredder]

So... I know this has been done to death here etc, but I do want to talk about my experience with the 'piracy' issue etc.

I've now hit the point where I'm doing paid work in this industry, it's getting there slowly but I never aimed at that, it was always for hobby etc....

When I started out... YES, I used a cracked Cubase, and hell I even downloaded the Waves bundle (deleted that shit straight off though, really.. I don't know why anyone would bother downloading those when there's a much better learning curve with the free shit).

I used it for mucking around, recording myself, trying to mic up my amp etc.. and so on. Because I'm like that, I like to throw my finger in every pie. So honestly, I didn't feel a hint of guilt at all. Why?? By downloading something that was never aimed for me, something I wasn't going to be using to turn a dime etc, whatever reason, I honestly felt no guilt whatsoever...

Say what you want about that, but I feel the same if people download our music... If they hear it, and aren't going to be following us, etc, have no vested interest, then it was never a loss to begin with.. Downloading our song means a few meg of bandwidth are taken up... WOO!

I digress... I hit the point where I thought, 'Hey.. you know what, I'm getting pretty decent at this, maybe I can help some local bands out etc'. And the second my first client came to me and I quoted them for the work.. Immediately I pulled the breaks and realized... If I used these cracks etc to use on this EP... then I'd be pretty disgusted with myself, I'd be making money from theft essentially...

So I deleted all my cracks, which actually turned out to be shit all but hey... And did the entire EP with Cubase and its stock plugins + free plugins I've found on here and on the net... It worked out fine and I learned a few things.

If anything it's helped me learn more and realize the ACTUAL shortcomings of some of this free stuff and my appreciation for those paid plugins has grown exponentially. So the other day I just went on a binge and bought The CLA Comp pack, Trigger and some other neat stuff... Why? Because I AM making money off of this, meager as it may be currently, it's still an exchange of cash for a service...

It'd be the same as stealing a shed and tools and getting paid to fix someones car I guess. Maybe not exactly, but you get the point..

Anyways... I think my point is mostly that I found my place in this issue. In my eyes, it's not an issue of Good/ Bad, Theft/ Purchase... It's about cause and effect. Nothing I did previous to doing paid work would have had any detrimental effect to the owners/ creators of those plugins... Nothing I did could literally have done anything negative in any way to those companies... Now had I used them on commercial work I did, then the issue is immediate and paramount. It's dirty money, end of story.

So yeah, I just felt like throwing that out there, it was a bit of a wake up call. Maybe not in tune with the UBER crusaders on either side of this argument, but I am definitely 100% sure of where I stand in all of this now.

 

[FarBeyondMetal]

Very good post. My one disagreement is that people who used cracked software as amateurs and become more professional buy the plugins or buy cheaper ones to protect their name and to look legit. People download music and follow the bands and even go to the shows of bands that they illegally downloaded, and never really think twice. That being said I think music piracy is actually more dangerous than software piracy.

 

[Ermz]

These issues are paramount to the epidemic of unsustainable undercharging in the industry.

One of the only reasons there are people out there who are able to work at rates like $50p/song is because they are saving thousands on software by grabbing it for free. This sort of behavior, in the long term, is completely unsustainable both for software developers, the 'engineers' and the industry as a whole. Something has to give, at some point.

When you trace it to its source, it's the music consumer at the heart of many of these issues. Less money for artists means less money to engineers, means less money on nice 'toys'. Yet, you're still somehow expected to compete on the same level as major label productions. It doesn't excuse theft, but it puts in perspective why the option might seem lucrative, or even necessary for so many.

 

[Melb_shredder]

@FarBeyondMetal: Well I agree with you entirely to be honest. In 2 ways. Like downloading the Waves pack, it was useless to me because I wasn't at the level to use it, AND realistically I could never probably afford or need it. Have I have purchased/ am purchasing currently are plugins I've used whether by Demo etc, and I've found them useful and something I can grow into etc. It's like when you use a piece of gear to the point where you've outgrown it, then it's time to find other things.. That doesn't mean go from Cubase built in plugs to the Waves Mercury bundle lol.

@Ermz: I'd say it's a mix of both the consumer and then on our end, the bedroom warrior styled people, as you said, people doing $50 a song etc... So you'll have to mix an album just to buy the CLA Comp pack essentially.. It's an exercise in futility. It's merely the quickest way to turning this craft and profession into the ground. Software engineers/ development companies like Waves aren't going to bow to it. Yes. they drop software prices sometimes, but the prices they are asking SHOULD be obtainable if you're making th expected amount as an engineer. Sometimes prices for things are actually ridiculous.. But most of those complaining are the ones in the bracket who charge too little and wonder why things seem so expensive comparatively

 

[Mutant]

Who needs cracks if these days you can just get REAPER for 60 bucks and 1000s of nice VST(I) plugins for free ???

 

[Anthropocide]

One of the only reasons there are people out there who are able to work at rates like $50p/song is because they are saving thousands on software by grabbing it for free.

You can buy Reaper just for 60$. It's almost free Moreover, you can get hundreds of freeware plugins such as ampsims, compressors, EQs, drum samples, etc. You don't have to grab anything or break the law even if you have no money to buy Cubase, Waves and other famous expensive software. So, the issue of low rates like 10-50$ per song is not because of piracy. It's because of very high competition on this market. Thousands of people in many countries want to become solid producers and earn money from it. But almost all of them can't achieve really decent quality, especially when working with poorly recorded small bands. Therefore, the only chance for them to get work is to charge less than others. Do you really think that all of those bedroom guys will refuse to get more money for their work? I don't think so. But nobody will pay them more than 50$ per song because of lack of quality. 5 years ago I was in the same boat. My first productions I made just for beer, not for real money! After many years of hard work I'm able to charge up to 300$ per song in Russia, and I don't care about competitors. If you are pretty decent professional, you don't have to worry about "bedroom competitors" who flooded around. Have you ever seen that Andy Sneap, Joey Sturgis (or somebody else at the same level) are complaining here about this issue?

It'd be the same as stealing a shed and tools and getting paid to fix someones car I guess.

Personally I would agree with this. Yes, when I was unknown musician I used to work on cracked software and it was not a shame... But when I earn real money with software, I must go and buy it. During the 2011 I spent almost 1500$ on various programs and drum samples. Although I have got illegal cracked Cubase and some plugins I use it rarely or never.

 

[TheDude]

These issues are paramount to the epidemic of unsustainable undercharging in the industry.

One of the only reasons there are people out there who are able to work at rates like $50p/song is because they are saving thousands on software by grabbing it for free. This sort of behavior, in the long term, is completely unsustainable both for software developers, the 'engineers' and the industry as a whole. Something has to give, at some point.

When you trace it to its source, it's the music consumer at the heart of many of these issues. Less money for artists means less money to engineers, means less money on nice 'toys'. Yet, you're still somehow expected to compete on the same level as major label productions. It doesn't excuse theft, but it puts in perspective why the option might seem lucrative, or even necessary for so many.

Well said. I agree.

 

[Jevil]

I think that if someone who is just hobbyist download cracked software, it is ethically wrong but not a big problem for the developers because that software wouldn't be sold anyway.
If professionals use this kind of software, then I think it is just stealing... well, not exactly, this is more like Ctrl+C whereas stealing would be Ctrl+X.


In my country there is a tax to compensate piracy. They charge you this tax in every memory card, hard disk, camera, scanner, , ipods, pendrive, Cd-r, dvd-r, and loads of gadget... What is the message to the people? "Hey, now that you pay for piracy you can download all that you want".

Then they deliver the money to best-selling artists cause they consider the more you sell the more illegal copies have been made.
My band had 180.000 downloads, imagine how many ipods, cds or whatever have been used... thousands! My music is not selling so I'm not a best selling artist, so I earned 0 €. Some fucking bastard is earning that money.

 

[updog]

why does everyone seem to think that plugin devs only sell their products for the professional market? of course they expect people to buy plugins even if they will never use it on anything commercial. it is ultimately loss of sales and nothing less.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

You can buy Reaper just for 60$. It's almost free Moreover, you can get hundreds of freeware plugins such as ampsims, compressors, EQs, drum samples, etc. You don't have to grab anything or break the law even if you have no money to buy Cubase, Waves and other famous expensive software. So, the issue of low rates like 10-50$ per song is not because of piracy.

You don't have to pirate anything, but 90% of these $50 kids do. Sorry, but that's just how it is. Charging $50 per song is a clear indicator that one doesn't have the slightest idea of how this business works, and stealing their tools is not a biggie to them.

It's because of very high competition on this market. Thousands of people in many countries want to become solid producers and earn money from it. But almost all of them can't achieve really decent quality, especially when working with poorly recorded small bands. Therefore, the only chance for them to get work is to charge less than others. Do you really think that all of those bedroom guys will refuse to get more money for their work? I don't think so. But nobody will pay them more than 50$ per song because of lack of quality.

$50 per song (let's say just mixing) would total up to around $6 per hour minus taxes. You can go looking for a crap car shop, but you still won't find a mechanic who works for six bucks an hour because he doesn't have his shit together. It's not the quality of the product, it's the fact that for every aspiring AE there are already five fuckwads who keep the prices so low that the AE in question doesn't want to charge properly for his work, thus becoming a problem for the industry himself.

Name ONE profession where you can find a legit professional working for $6/h because he's crap at his job.

5 years ago I was in the same boat. My first productions I made just for beer, not for real money! After many years of hard work I'm able to charge up to 300$ per song in Russia, and I don't care about competitors. If you are pretty decent professional, you don't have to worry about "bedroom competitors" who flooded around. Have you ever seen that Andy Sneap, Joey Sturgis (or somebody else at the same level) are complaining here about this issue?

No, I haven't, but I have seen you, the $300-per-song-mixer, offering to work for $33 per song a couple of weeks ago. It might not affect Andy, but it affects the middle league the most. Even you, it seems.

 

[Ermz]

Have you ever seen that Andy Sneap, Joey Sturgis (or somebody else at the same level) are complaining here about this issue?

Sneap complains about 'laptop metal' all the time. His beef, AFAIK, is with people using presets, samples and shortcut methodologies rather than doing a record properly. That's a natural extension of the issue that we're discussing here. The money thing wouldn't be a blip on his radar because he's in the major label world - far removed from the day to day grind of most independent producers.

Joey, I don't imagine would complain, largely because he was at the forefront of the wave to push 'release quality' metal production into the domestic studio. His whole approach, at first, seemed built around using very accessible methods to make a record. Ask the people who flocked here in their thousands, looking to emulate his sounds using next to non-existent budgets. This set a defacto standard for a large chunk of the metal scene actively endeavoring to sound like their music is programmed, rather than considering it a symptom of a 'restricted' recording process. The amount of damage this perspective did to the aesthetic quality of metal production across numerous levels is... significant. I believe this situation also partially touches on what Andy dubbed 'laptop metal'.

No offense to him, of course - I love Joey - and have immense respect for his work as a producer. He's absolutely unmatched at what he does. Unfortunately large elements of his fan base, who don't possess his skill at arrangement/production, have perverted the AE pursuit - using those methods as shortcuts, rather than as absolute means to an end.

It should be obvious how that ties into the heart of the issue here. All of these industry trends are tied together by strings of money (or lack thereof).

 

[Melb_shredder]

Yeah... Can't remember how many time we saw, "Joey sturgis presets? I haz a Pod... Now how do get tone??" Or... "what samples were used on this Joey production..."

The thing is.. Despite doing things that way Joey still managed to get great results and unique to him using those methods. But WHAT he used is something that is essentially 'cheap shit' so to speak. So everyone thinks they can do it! "hey guys,
I'll record you, I use podfarm like Joey! I can make you sound like X band".

 

[Anthropocide]

$50 per song (let's say just mixing) would total up to around $6 per hour minus taxes.

Do you always spend so much time (as 8 hrs) to mix only one song? Personally I can now mix (and master) full album just in 2-3 days if all stuff is recorded properly and already edited. A few years ago it took at least one month or even more... But now my mixing skills have been grown. And thanks to powerful and convenient software such as Reaper.

Name ONE profession where you can find a legit professional working for $6/h because he's crap at his job.

ANY freelance profession, e.g. translators, correctors, copywriters, programmers, web designers... It's not only in the audio industry. Also, $6/h is not that cheap as you think. $6/h = 960$/month. Maybe in Finland it is very ridiculous amount, but here in Russia (and in many other 3rd world countries) it is average salary for most employees at any regular job.

but I have seen you, the $300-per-song-mixer, offering to work for $33 per song a couple of weeks ago

It was strictly limited offer only for well-known bands and it had been cancelled after one week. I haven't got any work at these rates, just publicity Now I charge 100 Eur per song for bands outside Eastern Europe.

It might not affect Andy, but it affects the middle league the most.

I've seen you offering "mix one song for free" a year ago but I don't mind. Everyone has a right to offer huge discounts or free services if he needs it for getting publicity or testing new workflow. I see nothing wrong.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

Do you always spend so much time (as 8 hrs) to mix only one song? Personally I can now mix (and master) full album just in 2-3 days if all stuff is recorded properly and already edited. A few years ago it took at least one month or even more... But now my mixing skills have been grown. And thanks to powerful and convenient software such as Reaper.

Absolutely, and from what I gather, that's pretty much an average time spent on a song. It takes me 2-4 hours to get the basic mix down, 2-4 hours for all the automation (which I do a LOT) and the rest for tweaking. Quite honestly, I couldn't imagine mixing an album in two days without feeling I'm compromising the potential quality. If you can work that fast, hey, all the more power to you!

ANY freelance profession, e.g. translators, correctors, copywriters, programmers, web designers... It's not only in the audio industry. Also, $6/h is not that cheap as you think. $6/h = 960$/month. Maybe in Finland it is very ridiculous amount, but here in Russia (and in many other 3rd world countries) it is average salary for most employees at any regular job.

Then things are totally different over there. Here a McDonald's employee makes $12,7 per hour (according to their website), and instead of the much bigger self-employed expenses, they only pay the usual employee tax. I know a lot (as in... A LOT) of freelancers, both beginners and established professionals from different professions, and not one of them comes even remotely close to six bucks per hour.

I've seen you offering "mix one song for free" a year ago but I don't mind. Everyone has a right to offer huge discounts or free services if he needs it for getting publicity or testing new workflow. I see nothing wrong.

Since you pulled that card, don't you think it'd be appropriate to note the specifics of the deal? I moved into a new space, and offered to do the very first mix in the spot for free so I wouldn't fuck up a regular job due to being unfamiliar with the new monitoring environment. I did that one song, and instead of doing it for a broke band, I helped a fellow AE who couldn't finish the track in time because he was in the middle of a move himself. If you fail to see the difference there... Oh well

 

[Skinny Viking]

Has this ever been more appropriate?

 

[Uros]

Jarkko, tbh his offer was not for all bands, just for more popular ones, as he wanted to get publicity and spread his name out there, not to earn on it. Which is, in a way, similar to your case. I'll admit that he should have ask for more money, or to do it completely for free. This way it just looked cheap.

 

[Jarkko Mattheiszen]

Jarkko, tbh his offer was not for all bands, just for more popular ones, as he wanted to get publicity and spread his name out there, not to earn on it. Which is, in a way, similar to your case. I'll admit that he should have ask for more money, or to do it completely for free. This way it just looked cheap.

Exactly, and this was discussed quite a lot in the thread in question already. But yeah, I'm taking it a bit offtopic here, sorry.

And SkinnyViking

 

[Joelegend]

I didnt read every answer here. But you are not alone. Probably many done it that way. Same counts for me. Although i started out pretty quickly buying Cakewalk Homestudio, was cheap and shitty. But i could record stuff. Although i have everything legal now, i still dont make money with it ... yet maybe.
Then again, software developers know this. Its been like that for ages. If you as a software developer know your programs are worth the money, you basicly allow it to be cracked. Ofc they dont advertise about it. But since like most demos of programs are like totally ripped versions of the actual thing, and have only a too limited workingtime to fully understand it. Cracked software is the best advertising there for them. People can use it longer, learn it better, and become more potentional customers. No one is gonna spent hundreds of euro's or dollars, in some cases thousands, on something they actually have no idea of if they would be able to learn it. (some ppl just dont understand how some things work, not even after time). I remember this classmate from about ten years ago. He actually contacted the local Lightwave resellers to ask if they didnt sell educational versions. Their answer was: "no, it's easy enough to find a cracked one, you can use that to learn it". Till today, Newtek still doesnt sell edu versions. My idea about this is: most cracked software, keygens and so, are probably leaked out by the developers themselves.

 

[tempe]

Off the topic of the piracy debacle, since I'll just get angry and go on a rant. The ridiculously cheap rates are absolutely ruining the industry for the mid-level independent guys, I've lost more than my fair share of jobs for people either agreeing to work for free or for $50 a song. I only mix these days and I'm charging $200 per track, given a few exceptions such as I'm not going to charge that much for a singer/songwriter acoustic project as I am for a progressive orchestral metal epic with 400 tracks. I worked out my rates at $40 an hour, multiplied by the average amount of hours it takes me per song and even then I'm selling myself a bit short. I just can't charge any more in the current market.

Unfortunately what these people don't realize is by working so cheaply they aren't doing themselves any favors, no one is going to take you seriously at $50 a song. If I was just starting out I'd be charging at least $100 per track, its still cheap but its enough to not seem unprofessional.