I think this is really awesome news. And it deserves an own topic..

Now all Dom needs to do to get the all in one Synth/key/arranger workstation..
-Add KARMA functionallity
-Hire James as a demonstrator
-Update the Giga samples with top knotch gigasamples (including sounds that equall yamaha sounds and Ballance)
-Add some more controllers like a vector stick and a
-Ribbon controller
-X/Y controller over the touchscreen

But i admit another step was taken

Hi bachus
All your missing list features are possible to do...
The most important and OLD feature that I'm not able to develope, is to "cloning" the G-70 features to make finally happy Diki.
The day that we are able to includiing the G-70 on my workstation, then I THINK Diki is take too.
Joking

Thanks for the kind words.

Sounds like a great expansion.



lol... If I could just tie Diki to a chair for 1 hour in front of one I know he'd be converted to open keyboards.

Regards
James

MAybe the days are finally close that i can trest one of these in a dutch Music store one of these days...

Dom, will you be at the Musikmesse?

((oh, and add a 12" or bigger touch screen to that list of improvements, you missed a chance not implementing this in any of the upcomming new models, prices for these screens are really low these days))


[This message has been edited by Bachus (edited 02-14-2010).]

do you have your own styles on this or just use other manufacturers?

Wonder what LIONTRACS meant by the statement below.How much is this beast?


Just some days patience...we dont need months for complete this new features...

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 02-14-2010).]

James,

Can you buy one at a shop near to you? Looks like they are going places! Big Touch Screens and much more and less than £4000.00

Bachus,

Do you have a Portal into Ketron!

Nope... You can't even by a KORG Pa2X in a shop here without having to take a 220 mile round trip.

The online mega stores like Thomann have done serious damage to the music shops here in Ireland.

Regards
James

Sounds to me like he means the progarm is almost ready for release.

Regards
James

Kinky, James....

You already know how to change my mind. Only one way to do it. PLAY ME SOMETHING GOOD...

That's the problem with MS. Honestly, what happened? Did REALLY bad musicians ONLY buy them? Did really ONLY untechnical players buy them? Or did a few really talented arranger players buy them, and immediately went 'I can do this better on what I have, faster and cheaper'?.

BTW, I am NOT against open keyboards. Hell, I've been using VSTi's since they were invented. I'm against arrangers that make you do EVERYTHING yourself. As is 99.999% of the rest of the arranger community. I wouldn't mind an open KEYBOARD, but right now I'm able to do what I want in the studio with computers, don't need it live, don't need an expensive keyboard to duplicate what I already have...

BTW, is Ketron aware that the MS is about to pirate their copyrighted material (the audio loops)? Or does he, unlike when he announced that he was going to clone each and every sound of a T2 so you could play T2 styles on the MS (remember that one?), actually have an agreement with Ketron this time? He might want to be careful, because those guys are in the same country as he is. Steal their stuff, you might start checking under the hood before you start the car in the morning.

We've seen how rough you guys play, over there!

Diki,

Someone comes to the front door with a violin case and it ain't full of money!

Diki is anything copyright these days or is it all fair game, that notation software was free and it looks OK even TONEWHEELDUDE says he likes free software.

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 02-14-2010).]

James I thought he was having a dig at some else with the updates, some one near to!

lol.... Yes I picked up on that too but I was trying to do you a favour by not mentioning KETRON and their complete lack of all ability to get OS4.0 out.


Cheers
James

James,

I love your diplomatic approach, glad you said K****n and not me! Where can you get MS from?

The issue of copyright is a big concern today, styles are the thin edge of the wedge but are still affected.



There is a HUGE difference between software obtained without paying (free) and Open Source.

I would never have any software or music on my computer that is not legal for me to own. I have 40GB of music on my laptop, every song is legal. Some of you guys write your own styles, you know how much work goes into it. Plus Audya uses live musicians, so its not just the style writer that are involved.

I'm sure if the Mediastation makers include Tyros or Audya styles they will have an agreement with the relative companies.

TWD

Correct Tony
Diki is just frustrated and can not find another arguments...

Just to point:
Live-Arranger is NOT my own application, is developed from Norbert ( live-styler.de), we make here ONLY the integration on our system.
When the Live-Arranger will be available, you can BUY the full license and application from Norbert, NOT from lionstracs.
When someone will send me the Karma application, we will make the same, like the all others application.

IF Ketron is scared, they have just to contact Norbert and start fight legally.

In this last 5 years that our sound designer have cloned with the Extreme sample converter, ton of Yamaha, Roland, Korg.... sounds and aslo styles.
NO one of this brand till today sent me ONE email, Fax or any call...it mean that anybody there are totally FREE to clone what they want, including Ketron sounds...
More you pressing on this argument and more I have fun to pay new developers to clone the all is possible.
Are years that I'm waiting for a nice call from this big brands....someone there is interested to buy my whole project and stopping all??
Just call...I'm always here waiting

It doesn't seem a very professional approach to run a business. Surely it would be better to talk to Yamaha/ Ketron before copying them in case you are faced with possible legal issues?

If you ended up with huge legal costs where would that leave your customers?

Don't get me wrong, I think what you have done with the mediastation is amazing, and if it encourages people to buy styles from the original source its fine, but not if your ripping them off and copying them.

TWD

[This message has been edited by Tonewheeldude (edited 02-14-2010).]

At this point..I'm tinking when I can give one MS S-Stock for FREE to James.
James..do you like have this B-stock MS EMPTY or also with the full 30Gb gigalibrary sounds and data?
less Gb installed..less Kg freight/shipment to pay...

But then can anyone tell me the legal difference betweem sampling a Steinway piano and sampling a Korg Synth sounth?

Just anotgher note:
when someone download and install my new OS 4.0, do NOT include ANY GIGA/VST sounds and styles!
we include also one basic Debian sounds installer of our Giga soundbank GM and some Free VST/Asio Demo version host, thats all.
what then the custumers will install on the 250/1T Gb Hard disk is NOT our problem.

Hi bachus
Maybe the answer can be simple..
the true owner of Steinway is dead, Korg is alive..
guess now from who you can get a legal letter?
Kidding

Hell James you are a luck sod, FOC, MS, the luck of the Irish is with you, will it have Microsoft Office 2007, if it hasn't i will send you a bent copy. Oh and Autocad 2009. Hope the hell it don't crash on you, he does say what colour Black or Red sorry not in Green! Bugger Bugger! He only says is is tinking, he's ever speaking Irish.

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 02-14-2010).]

Hi Diki



lol...



Wish I had one to do just that. There's no reason in the world why this keyboard shouldn't sound great now. All known OS issues of the past have all been addresses and the new OS is supposed to be running faster than ever and like a dream.



You heard everything I did.

End users playing completely out of time and posting inappropriate examples does help things that's for sure. I think with so much focus on the demo's at the time, maybe those who had the ability to play well didn't feel comfortable putting their music online.

It's understandable too, it wasn't their duty to do so, and in all fairness it would be like throwing yourself out to the wolfs because everyone was so hungry in wanting to hear something good.



I know your not against them, but the issue was deeper than that. It was about ability they have and the benefits of having a single system that integrated everything into one seamlessly package, VS a closed arranger.

I believe an OPEN arranger is the future and can be quickly customised to do far more than a closed arranger, and I think you were pretty much of the opposite opinion based on how much work would need to be done initially to get it doing what you want. Without anyone around who owned one and who would take part in the conversation verify facts we would have never gotten anywhere. It did get a bit much in the end too as there are only so many ways we can say the same things.

It's like the KARMA demo I posted. Look at how much confusion a silly little video cleared up in a matter of seconds because it directly addressed the issue being discussed. That's the sort of thing Lionstracs need in my opinion.



It's a complex subject that deserves it's own thread. Not in relation to what Lionstracs are doing but the overall topic of sharing styles. Everyone here is probably a thousand times more guilty with all the styles they have collected over the years, but apparently so long as no fee is charged for the styles, there is a rather big loophole in the system.

If you buy a Style Disks it comes with a copyright statement, but if you buy an entire keyboard full of styles, it comes with no copyright warning at all. It has something to do with the fact that the product can be only considered one thing and not many things.

For example, it's either a musical instrument, or it's a computer. Law is black and white.

Cheers
James

But then, just add THIS to any top of the line Workstation like M3, and you have ultimate possibilities, as long as you are prepared to tweak every style.

I'd add KOMPLETE for sure and espescially at that price and some more memmory. And offcourse Omnisphere.

Just need to get a handson, and i am wondering if the VSTi belonging to the M3 could run on Mediastation too.

If more units get their way to mainstream musicians this could be the instrument to build a huge fanbase of style creators.


But i also think Diki had a point... The open systems keep missing what makes an arranger, a well ballanced set of styles and sounds that works straight out of the box. Sadly the Q-ranger while being an awesome tool for live use is like a bar that only sells softdrinks.

Wow.... I have to pinch myself here, I must be dreaming. Heck YEAH. That would be truly fantastic. Thanks a million.

Promise I will put it to very good use too.

Kind Regards
James.

PS:..... Diki, your in some trouble now mate....

It should do because it does behave exactly like a VSTi.
In addition to that, with the M3 connected you could also install the PC version of KARMA on the Lionstracs keyboard and it would work.

So, while the M3 is connected you would have KARMA running on both the M3 and Lionstracs keyboard.

Regards
James.

Thing I have always wanted to hear honestly, is not ONLY something decent worth a listen, but also a frank and honest discussion about how long it took them to achieve that result. I'm aware of how high quality VSTi's can take your sound, but I'm also aware of the formidable work it often takes to get those results of the highest caliber. Multiply that by the songload of most gigging arranger players, and you could easily end up with a task that would take so long to complete (before you could even take it out to gig) that most wouldn't attempt it (if they knew in advance).

BTW, ponder this, those of you that consider swiping styles. OK... yes the industry is pretty lax at enforcing their copyright of styles made entirely from MIDI, but the copyright laws and enforcement of those laws is MUCH more stringent, rigid, and easy to prove in court when you are talking AUDIO. Mechanical rights are a whole different thing to MIDI files. Ask any rapper who lifted a sample and didn't clear it...

Ketron pay a FORTUNE for their audio loops, compared to a MIDI file. And it is as stringently copyrighted as any Micheal Jackson hit. Audio has its' own rules, completely different from MIDI.

And, even in the case of styles, Yamaha have been known to go after sites that put up their Premium styles, or sites that disseminate the styles of a brand new arranger while it is still hot on the shelves. If the LiveStyler was able to play the latest Yamaha style formats, and someone actually HAD gone out and cloned a T3 in all its' glory (SA2, Mega and everything ), you honestly think they are going to let that clone take their business?

Dom just shrugs and goes 'I just make the gun and the bullets, I don't actually KILL anyone', but when you see posts from HIM, telling everybody about the ability to play Ketron's loops, he's now telling people HOW to kill people, in effect. And once you can show intent (and a profit reason for disseminating that information) it's a LOT easier to prove intent. Don't think that facilitating copyrighted information has any consequences, ask the guy who invented Napster. They shut him DOWN... (the bisiness he's in now, and what Napster has become is all about NOT copying illegally).

If Dom announced a licensing agreement with Ketron, I would be celebrating it, not trying to take a shot at him (as he thinks it is - if Roland did the same thing, I would be equally critical). But at least I remember the whole furor when he announced the T2 clone project. Two things come to mind. Firstly, it never worked (as do many of his ideas in the real world), and it disappeared off the face of the planet pretty quickly.

I wonder why?

Hi Diki

I've actually paid for research to be done on this subject and in the end the solicitor couldn't provide me with one law that would be broken if I sampled another keyboard. Yet she could quote pages of information on what law would be broken if I sampled someone else's recorded works.

Ok so when I heard the words “recorded works” I said ok that's how the factory sounds are protected. She then corrected me and said no, not at all.

Where it all got confusing was the second you try apply the law to a musical instrument. You cannot copyright the sound a musical instrument produces and there is nothing left open for debate in that at all. It's a simple open and shut case. You can only copyright your programming that actually went into creating the factory data.

The argument presented by her was where do you think the keyboard manufactures get all their waveform data from in the first place and how is that any different from you sampling their keyboard she said.

It's a good argument actually.

If you were to reproduce the programming that went into creating the final sound, then your screwed but as we all know, sampling is does not reproduce anything other than the sound it hears, so your not reproducing anyone else's programming by sampling.

Now apply that to factory styles. Now you are in a situation where you are reproducing the actual programming or part of it. However the factory styles that come with your musical instrument come under a royalty free copyright statement which throws the law out of whack and makes it very hard for the developers to sue you of making copes if their data if you are not charging for it. .

So long as your not charging for the styles, then there has been no infringement of the royalty free licence because the data is still free.

Please note, none of what I've just said is a representation of my feelings or opinion on the subject. I'm purely only sharing the research I paid for and even though the answer I got was clear, I won't be tempting faith.

That said, in the history of Samplers and Style sharing, nobody has ever been done for doing it and by hell it goes on every day on a massive scale. So maybe the research is 100% correct.

Regards
James

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 02-14-2010).]

I think there's a clear legal difference between a set of samples to make a multi-sampled instrument (note I didn't say there's a MORAL difference) and ripping off someone's loops wholesale. In fact, there's PLENTY of case law pertaining to one person ripping off an entire CD of sampled loops (think Voices of Native America, any loop collection of famous drummers playing their signature beats, etc.) and selling them. Or using them in productions without a licensed copy of the original.

We've long ago had the go-round about whether MIDI styles are copyright or not (basically, they are if they are, it's up to the vendor to pursue the offender) but case law is long and hard against those that lift audio performances (which are what all the drum, bass and guitar loops in an Audya are).

The thing that really gets me going, and could probably give any decent lawyer a decent case against him, is that Dom doesn't just make the tools to use this piracy available, he comes HERE (and probably a lot of other forums, too) and TELLS you about the new pirate abilities, as an inducement to buy his product. Follow the money...

It's kind of like Apple telling everybody where to get the warez to run on their computers, so people will buy them. Stay quiet and let people figure it out for themselves, they can throw their hands in the air and go 'it's not us'. But TELL them where the warez are, SHOW them how to use them, help them with troubleshooting the warez, you think that Apple wouldn't be up to their necks in lawsuits?

I know it's a knotty problem, but we either pay attention to it, or, when someone rips off your pop hit created on an MS, and distributes it for free (or even worse, uses it to promote THEIR product without your permission), what legs do you have to stand on..?

Hi Diki.



I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, I'm just going to say this highly subjectively from a legal point of view.

I see two problems with what your saying.

1: Your talking about data that is NOT provided royalty free.
2: Your talking about a software package or a products that has been completely copied.

Fact is the styles are royalty free and there are part of a musical instrument. You can't exactly steal something that's free unless your charging money for the free data.



I don't think so because the data is royalty free and he's also not the developer of the Software that is going to play back the styles.

It's the same as your Gun and Bullets example. It's very easily argued. For example, who is to blame if you pirate a DVD Movie which is 100% copyrighted material and illegal to copy

The company who made the computer you used, DVD Writer, the blank disk, the company that wrote the software that removes the encryption or you.

Anyway got to run.

James

The capability to do something and actually doing something are totally different.
EMC Styleworks would have been banned long ago if owning something to convert one style format to another was illegal, however as it only provides the capabilities, not the styles, then there is no problem.
On the other hand, if the purchasers of Styleworks gives copy write styles they have converted to other formats, to someone else, then THEY are breaking the law. (Not the company that makes the software)

Livstyler will play Yamaha styles, but no Yamaha copy write ones are provided, (That’s up to the user to purchase)
Sounds for styles: (Mega voices, Loops etc.)
Analogy:
GM makes a car with 5 speed gearbox, 4 wheels, Air Conditioning, CD Player and glove box, Ford copy this and begin selling it with their own badge, GM can then sue Ford for infringement of copy write.
On the other hand, if Ford makes its own car with its own parts that does exactly the same as the GM car, GM can do nothing about it because nothing of theirs has been used.
The same applies to Mega voices, Loops etc., so that providing the manufacture does not include the manufacturers ones (He designs his own) then there is no infringement.
This is how the Wersi system works, in that Wersi designed their own Mega voices (Called ACC voices) and software, thus allowing Yamaha compatibility without infringement. (They DO NOT supply any Yamaha styles)
Like all reputable companies, Wersi informs the customer of the manufactures trademarks. (In the case of Wersi, this includes Akai, Steinberg (VST) and Yamaha)

Bill

But this is my whole point (note my italics). Dom does NOT come here and say 'you can play Ketron styles with this software, but you CAN'T use Ketron's audio loops, because they are copyrighted', he just off and crows that it WILL play Ketron audio styles. Not even the slightest nod towards letting the user make the decision to use or not use the protected content. For, in truth, who WOULD use Ketron styles without the audio component? They're pretty much useless without it...

I make the guns, I make the bullets, I sell them to you, here's where the guy you hate lives, here's when he gets home, here's where best to shoot him to ensure a kill, here's the number of a good lawyer and a crooked judge....

How FAR down that path can I go before I become culpable in the death?

Hi Bill.

EMC does come with some factory styles, and they have been selling massive volumes of factory styles from every make of keyboard off their website for years.

I actually bought one of their CD's. It was called Universal Style Bank and it contained a copy of every factory style from every major Keyboard released at the time, and they even supplied it to me in KORG i30 format.

There was something like 1500 styles on the CD alone and they have a lot more for sale now.

Regards
James

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 02-15-2010).]

Hi Diki.



It's universally known that all factory styles are under a royalty free licence.

So how do you break a royalty free licence by selling a program designed to play back those files which another company paid for and intended for use on their keyboard ?

They cannot restrict their use to their product under a royalty free licence unless they make you sign a licence agreement.

Regards
James

PS. I'm not taking sides, I'm just saying royalty free is what it is.

All dom says is that it can play native audya styles.. Not that those styles are included..

Its like saying a DVD player can play DVD R and RW, nothing more nothing less... Nothing wrong with that.

I only says what the live-arranger developer wrote me:
Hello,

I have made a special Live accompaniement.
It is a very very good tool. Very easy and simple.
And it has a great sounding.
This tool can play ALL Ketron styles from Solton to Audya
(This is the 1st accompaniement worldwide with this function!!!!!!)

What we make here is only the full integration on my system for a better and easy use with our OS interface.
When all is ready ( really soon), you have to buy this special package license, extract on Presets folder, fill/copy your all own ketron styles on the QSTYLES folder and: PLAY.

update:
I have also played Audya styles, you can see on the mixer the groove BAR working too.

As I understand it, styles are copyright free to the PURCHASER. Yamaha have successfully closed down several sites that were distributing their styles before they went stale ( ). If, as you claim, there is NO intellectual property rights to them, what right would they have to do this..?

But my original point was to inform that there are MUCH more stringent rules about the copying of audio files than there is style DATA. Essentially, the law applies fairly equally between say a drum loop from a keyboard and Madonna's latest hit. For a start off, it's VERY easy to prove a waveform is the original. It's as easy as a fingerprint or DNA. No dodging the issue with questions about whether you COULD have come up with the same MIDI pattern yourself. Audio is unique.

And the fines and penalties for doing so, should the original maker of the audio (or their lawyers) decide to come after you (say if you had a hit with something made from it), are pretty draconian. Of course, it is still up to YOU how you use the technology... But if you think the issue is bullsh*t, ask The Verve where the money from their hit 'Bittersweet Symphony' went.

There's probably nothing to stop you putting cracked copies of all the VSTi's on your MS, too. But make no bones, you put stolen Ketron audio styles on this thing, you are doing no different. All that remains is your own conscience. And maybe the terrifying thought that, IF you have any success with it, one day someone could come knocking on YOUR door...

They'll be knocking on your door indeed, and not on Dom's door, and that was the point you where making all the time, so why this sudden change?

But tell me, how can there be a copy right on a Samba or a Beguine, noboddy is owner of those general styles. And if Yamaha makes a songstyle for Michael Jacksons beat it, do they pay royalties to The owner of that Music. I bet they don't as the style is not an exact copy of the musical piece. Just an interpretation.

And has Korg ever payed Steinway for using samples of their Piano's?

Sure there have been lawsuits about using riffs, but i disagree that its steeling when using a few notes with an intense harmony from another song. Just tell me how many Poalka's are there? and noboddy is talking about steeling thins there.

Its a thin line mate... i would not spend to much money on law cases if i was Ketron but spend the money on promoting their own stuff.

Someone that will buy a mediastation would never buy a Audya as those systems are totally eachothers opposite..

But people telling everyone how good their Audya styles sound on Mediastation might make other people that are less technical buy Ketron instead of Yamaha. Its how Micro$oft got a big company.

[This message has been edited by Bachus (edited 02-15-2010).]

if Ketron Audya styles are full copyrighted,then you can not see/hear recorded video/sound on internet and youtube. if Ketron Audya styles are full copyrighted you can not make a song or demo and send here on synth zone. you can not use it live becouse of copyrighte.


but that live arranger module is not only for ketron internal styles i think. users can buy then third party audio styles created for Ketron Audya. or MS users can record styles in ketron audya format and play on MS.

IF styles are copyrighted, then you can not play internal ketron styles but you can buy third party styles. for ketron audya styles format Nobert from livestyler.de used a EMC Style Works license he used the EMC Style Works license
already for Live Styler gold, so you can play roland-ketron-yamaha-korg- and............
when you buy live arranger module from nobert you have EMC license for ketron styles, if copyrighte is broken for ketron style format then EMC is responsible and not lionstracs or livestyler.de i think.


[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 02-16-2010).]

Just a small update:
OS 4.1 that support the new Live arranger with ketron styles is available now: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/live-arranger-module-p-247.html

good news but it wil not play audya styles with audio loops, it play the midi in the style but not the loops, there fore you most have a SD2 sound module it has audio loops. i hope i am wrong about this!

one thing that i do not undrstand is that nobert answered me on e-mail that he can make a livestyler gold version for MS/Groove with other brands support to, but this module only reads 2 brands, the gold version price is about 107 euro and soon it play audya styles to.



[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-15-2010).]

is that true? thats interesting i thought itt was playing the audio drums too.

it is what i think you most have a SD2 sound module for loops, but if i am wrong domenico can answer this and correct me.



[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-12-2010).]

What part of 'copyrighted styles are copyright free to the PURCHASER' did you not understand, AFG..?

Purchasing the styles gives you the right to do anything you want with them, other than to resell them to others. Wishing it were otherwise doesn't change a thing.

And I have bent over backwards on this thread to point out the difference between MIDI styles (which are much harder to prove that they are stolen) and audio styles, which are VERY easy to prove ownership of.

Sorry, AFG. Better luck next time...

what do you mean with audio styles? ketron audya style are pat files. inside pat files you have midi triger comands for audio loops, but the loops are not inside the pat file but on audya rom or harddisk. you not understand how audya styles works. correct me if i am wrong about this.............

it is not qranger, becouse on qranger you a folder for each style a folder,inside the folder you have wave files and a midi file and qranger session file. when you load the session file on qranger editor every thing loads automatically, midi+wave loops+settings


[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-12-2010).]

Keep trying, AFG. Perhaps you'll be as pro-piracy when YOU have a nice big hit, and someone else steals it and distributes it for free

Ketron's 'Live' styles use audio loops that Ketron had made (at considerable expense) and play as part of the style. Whether they reside on a separate part of the HD or are part of the style file structure, they ARE part of the style (turn them off and listen to the style now... is it any good?). You have no right to use the style, in fact of law, unless you have paid for it.

Try this. Go out, and rent a good studio for a few days. Hire a TOTL drummer for a few days, a TOTL guitarist for a few days, and record loop after loop, all of which have to be PERFECTLY CONSISTENT from take to take (no easy task), all perfectly 'in the pocket', for multiple variations, fills, intros, endings and different chord types (for the guitarist, at least). Use world class drums, amps, guitars, mikes, pre's, outboard processing, etc.. This will cost you maybe €10,000, not counting editing time...

NOW GIVE IT AWAY FOR FREE...

Yeah, right...

for 91 % i do not use any style created by others, you know that. and western styles what i have are from lionstracs qranger i am not responsable for that.

but you think that ketron audya style files have audio loops inside the file. you are wrong!

the audio files are on ketron audya, it mean on ketron rom hardware or protected harddrive. or you can use SD2 module for audya style becouse it have audio loops i think on hardware again. it mean you most have ketron hardware sd2 sound module is that piracy?

and you think there wil be never third party audio style for ketron audya that you can pay and use!

if audya works good there wil come third party audio styles for audya when you pay and use that is that piracy?



[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-12-2010).]

I have NEVER mentioned self produced audio styles. What you do with your own work is entirely up to you. You somehow miss so much of what I say, AFG...

Whether the audio part of the Ketron factory style resides on the HD or in a ROM chip, it can easily be copied. And THIS is what I have been talking about. Let's be honest, here... Do you honestly think that the majority of people happy to see some way of playing Ketron styles on the MS (or a laptop, or any emulator) are happy because it now gives them the opportunity to make their OWN audio loop based styles in Ketron format? They already HAVE that ability with the MS or Livestyler.

No, they are rejoicing because now they will be able to play Ketron factory audio styles (or other pro-produced Ketron styles) without having to buy a Ketron (which is what helps Ketron pay for the styles to be made). And I guarantee few of them will buy all the styles they want.

Please try reading my posts more carefully (but I understand and sympathize how difficult this may be to a non-English speaker) before you make any more assumptions about what I am saying, AFG. I try to be as clear as I can...

Oh, and just to reiterate my point...

Let's assume that your self-produced styles are SO good, that you decide to go into business, and sell them, as a way of recouping your costs (and maybe make some money!). Now how are you going to feel, after you sell one or two, and then see them copied and used widely by people that haven't payed you a single lira?

Maybe NOW you understand the point I'm making...

You have a MUCH better chance suing someone for unauthorized use of your style if there is an audio loop component to the style. It is EASY to prove in court that it IS your work, no-one could have made an identical loop to you. Someone has a big hit using your style without buying it, you stand to make a LOT of money...

Sounds good, now, doesn't it..?

i get your points, so do not loop your words, lol.I can not speak or write English but i understand your words becouse they are not new they are looping and looping again(I'm kidding)

what i say is that there is no audio loops within the Ketron pat format files. pat file is just midi files encrypted but Ketron format. the loops from ketron hardware can be sampled but you do not know how ketron use them( are they sliced and saved as drumkits? are they one loop and not sliced? how they are saved on harddrive? which loops are used in which style?............)

but there is still another option, third party styles or buy Ketron SD2 module.

did you get my points now?

and if some members here think that they can now play ketron audya styles with ketron audya orginal audio loops on lionstracs i have to disappoint them, you get a style without audio loops. until you buy a SD2 module. you most have sd2 sound module for that. or soon third party audio styles. or maybe they used by livestyler.de other loops then ketron loops for that, we do not know that!!!!!!!!!!!!!




[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-12-2010).]

Well, seems we're BOTH 'loop-ing' alot, here.

I get your point, but buying an SD2 module does NOT give you the right to use factory styles without buying them. And, in all fairness, people LIKE the Ketron styles primarily for the ones that DO have 'Live loop' components. They are what make them stand out head and shoulders above the rest.

I am well aware of how Ketron implement their loop technology on older Ketron's AND the new Audya, please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting I don't. But whether the audio component of the loop exists as sliced up data for a MIDI file to play it (which is basically how they do it) on a ROM chip or HD, it CAN (and will) be copied. You only have to solo the audio track playing the SD2, and slow it WAY down to get the slices to play without much cross-fading (if any, if you slow it down enough) and you can easily record the results for use on the MS, or the Ketron player. All it does it output MIDI. Make a GIGA preset or any other VSTi sampler preset of the data, and you can play it as if you had an Audya (after all, who's going to want old SD1/5 styles, especially when it's easier to copy the HD data on an Audya and get the same files?). From what I read from others here (correct me if I'm wrong) the Audya's audio loop data exists as easily copyable .wav files. Seems altogether TOO easy to copy, if you ask me...

But basically, if Ketron lose their revenue stream from people buying their arrangers to get the styles because they are playing them on software either on an MS or even into an SD2 module (which makes Ketron a FRACTION of the money they would get selling an SD5 or Audya), they are going to make less and less of them. And they make few enough already!

I hope you understand the point I've been 'loop-ing' now, AFG. It's a complex issue, that has long-term consequences for the industry, and those that love Ketron products and styles...

[This message has been edited by Diki (edited 03-12-2010).]

maybe i am wrong read this someone played ketron audya style with live audio drums on lionstracs groove link:

http://www.wersi.co.at/forum/replacement-for-wersi-t1381.html

maybe they have replaced other loops then orginal one to the style, like i said before, domenico or nobert most answer this i think

They will be producing their own styles and loops for the groove, just like they produced styles and samples for Wersi OAS instruments.
NOTE: As it is an Austrian dealer, (They also sell Wersi, Ketron, Roland and Orla) the styles and loops will be more European focussed, just like the styles and samples for the Wersi instruments. http://www.tastenpoint.at/shop/index.php?cPath=29 (Not all links work at the moment as he is currently rebuilding the database after a crash)
Hope this helps

Bill

If you think that most people are going to go out and suddenly start producing their own professional loops that integrate with existing Ketron styles, I am positive you don't know most arranger players!

The vast majority of them don't even EDIT the styles they have, let alone make new ones even in MIDI. And recording and producing pro quality loops, slicing and dicing them and integrating them into a style is a task beyond even 1% of all arranger users.

No, this technology is going to be used to pirate Ketron's audio styles, plain and simple.

As I said, if you WANT to make your own styles from scratch, and incorporate your own loops into it, you don't need the Ketron style player at all! You already HAVE that capability. The reason the Ketron style player is being greeted so warmly is that people will now be able to play Ketron's copyright styles without buying a Ketron. There's simply no other way to look at it.

Sorry.

Diki.
Can you show me where Ketron say that their styles are copyrighted ?

lol... No ? Thought so.

Regards
James

One thing people are forgetting from this discussion is that when a manufacturer sells an arranger, they are not selling the styles.

That is why the style is not copyrighted to the manufacturer.

The manufacturer is selling the hardware unit.
The hardware unit integrates styles, sounds, OS and build quality in to one unit. That is what the manufacturer is selling.


Even if the MS can play Audya or any other arranger style (whether midi or audio) is not something that a manufacturer is too concerned about.
Because an MS is not an Audya.

An MS does not have all the Audya’s sounds, sthyles, OS, build quality integrated on it. Audya on MS is a poor man’s way of an Audya.

And, if you still don’t get what I am saying, if you still do not get the concept, try this.

If the MS samples a piano sound from the Korg M3, and then says the MS can play that wonderful sound from the Korg M3, do you think Korg is going to loose sleep over that?

In fact, that has been happening for years.

Yamaha have successfully got online sites from distributing their current styles. If there's no such thing as copyright, how do you suppose they accomplished that feat?

Take a look in the fine print of your manual, or search through their website carefully. You'll usually find an EULA that specifies how and where you can and can't use their styles. As I've been saying for a while, enforcement varies, some police them carefully, especially the latest, greatest that they put out. And enforcement is problematical, with MIDI data being so universal. Very tough to prove that a style is their own work if any editing is done to it. But audio is as easy to prove as DNA, and the same laws protect audio in the form of mega-hits as does a loop library.

C'mon, James, you can't be serious. You know that your sample libraries for sale are protected by the same intellectual property rights as the loops in a style. Are you saying then that anybody can copy your commercial sample libraries, and there's nothing you can do about it? If so, send me some examples, and I'll sell them and use them without paying you a penny...

There's an AWFUL lot of wishful thinking about this subject going on here, and VERY little educated opinion. If you don't know copyright law, if you don't know whether something is protected by law or not, do you think it is a good idea to just go ahead and PRETEND that there is none?

Try contacting Ketron directly, ask them if it OK for you to copy the audio data from their Live Drums styles and use their styles for free, without buying a Ketron product whatsoever... Best of luck with that one!

Look, I can come round to your house and steal your stuff, I can even blog about the fact that I am going to do it, and that I don't believe that there is any law against it... but that won't change the fact that I will get arrested for doing it (if caught), and pleading ignorance of the law will not get me the tiniest break. I'll still go to jail, and deservedly so.

And I am appalled at the act of reading a provider of copyrighted content somehow claiming that there IS no protection for anybody else's work. Somehow, I have a feeling that James would vigorously defend his OWN rights to his labors, if infringed, but somehow doesn't think that applies to HIM if he wants to steal something...

Hi

I can not understand that some persons can not understand the term "copyright".

Copyright = "the right to make copies". This right belongs to the creator. Period. (A novellist has the copyright to his novel; a composer has the copyright to his music; a style creator has the copyright to his styles etc.)

The creator can of course sell the copyright. But having bought a copy does not give you the right to make copies.

Is this hard to understand?

Regards
Jørgen

------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

For people that want to justify their own piracy, apparently it is...

Hi joso.

Your assuming full copyright just like Diki is. None exists that anyone here can reference.

Factory styles are Royalty Free. How else can you use them without needing permission from Ketron for every song you write.

That doesn't mean you can do whatever you like with them either. But it does mean you can get away with pretty much anything you want so long as you don't charge money for the data.

Regards
James

Diki, I do understand where your coming from but creating a copy of one of my sample libraries and giving it away for free is piracy because you have just completely copied my entire product and have now made it obsolete.

Giving away Audya factory styles which are royalty free is not the same thing. The product in question is not the styles here, it's the Audya. Giving the styles away does not in anyway reproduce the Audya. Yes, it's reproducing part of it as in the style patterns, but that data is also provided royalty free.

So I'm not sure how Ketron can do anything here.

If on the other hand you were charging for the styles, well then that is a clear violation of the royalty free licence.

You may not like it, personally I don't either but that's just the way it is. Neither you or I can do anything about it. No law is being broken here at all.



lol.... As the old saying goes, assumptions are the mother of all F**** up's and boy is everything your saying based on the assumption that the data is just straight up copyrighted.

If ANYTHING you said were even remotely true, then you could easily prove it by sticking the copyright in my face from any manufacture. It would be available to you. The mere fact it's not should tell you something.

I've seen an official NDA/Contracts. The Author signs over “all their rights” to the data to Ketron and then Ketron release it under the royalty free licence.

Regards
James

here you can read about Royalty-free license on wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty-free

if Nobert from livesstyler.de had violated the law, then Ketron had enough time to do something about.


diki might be right about my english but they have written here that the main arranger on MS/Groove is qranger , and they are making audio styles for qranger:
http://www.wersi.co.at/forum/replacement-for-wersi-t1381.html


[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-14-2010).]

I don't like to discuss and rebat...
Test yourself: http://www.lionstracs.com/store/livearranger-demo-p-248.html
Free download..don't worry.

nice interface

now only waiting for response from people who like to play AUDYA Ketron styles on MS / Groove.


Nobert as a smart man knows all the rules of law before that he start programming of software. programers are not stupid, especially when the law goes on something. his other program live-styler plus years has been for sale.

and a piracy programer as diki think about some programers, will never sell anything publicly.

I hope some people quiqly test this program.

but one thing I do not understand, as Ketron here says nothing about why diki is hotter than the heat source itself.

Hi



Of course you can use the styles for your songs. But this has nothing to do with copyright.

I am just saying that it is not allowed to make copies of styles. And it doesn't matter if you sell copies for money or give them away for free.

Jørgen

------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Hi joso.



But it does, where else do you think the permission to use them in your songs comes from. It's the royalty free licence that gives you permission, and that's the copyright that gives you the freedom to do many things.



The law is the law, it's very much black and white on the subject of copyright and licensing. As much as you may not like the situation, the fact is no law is being broken here.

Here's some food for thought too. Lets pretend your right for a moment. If that were the case then your own website could easily be seen as a major hub for promoting large scale piracy. With only a few clicks on your website I can find all sorts of tools that break your view of copyright law as well as links to factory styles extracted from other keybaords and converted to Yamaha format.

So it's kind of funny really hearing you say it's not ok to share styles, yet your website promotes it and offers tools for modifying copyrighted data.

Lets not get stuck on the details, I'm merely saying this to just help explain a point of view and help clear up this difference of opinion people have on the subject.

Fact is no law is being broken here. As I said, you may not like this, but it's the law and licence the styles are under that allow it.

Regards
James

[This message has been edited by Irishacts (edited 03-14-2010).]

About sharing: You are free to share any style if you have the copyright. (I have no possibility to check if this assumption is correct.)

About tools: You are are free to modify styles you have in your keyboard or you have purchased legally. This is not breaking the copyright.

I repeat: Copyright = the right to make copies.

Read more at: http://www.reach.net/~scherer/p/copyrit1.htm - http://www.higgs.com/archive/articles/midi-keyboard.html - http://mpa.org/copyright_resource_center/copying

EOD from my part.

Best wishes
Jørgen


------------------
The Unofficial YAMAHA Keyboard Resource Site

Stick this in your pipe and smoke it... http://www.synthzone.com/ubbs/Forum37/HTML/012260.html

Now grow up, kids. You can't have all the candy on the shelves just because the store owner put it on display.

You buy the arranger, you have BOUGHT the right to use the styles. You don't buy the arranger (or the styles from their own store) you DON'T have the right to use the styles.

How many times we got to go round and around on this already settled topic?

diki if you buy a dvd player you can always play and watch the orginal or copy.

you have the same issue with software like livestyler or your sequencer software. your sequencer software can also play or edit copyrighted products,

then you are not allowed to use a sequencer software or DVD player?

but they are not banned. why because they only use the file format.

the same as in this case. they only use the file format Ketron or yamaha.

for example:

do not say My G70 can not play midi songs.

how many free midi songs you got on your G70?

Why can a G70 convert midi songs to style?

copyright covers everything except the midi songs that roland used?

then roland broken copyright, by giving free midi songs or by given to you technique to to convert midi songs to style.


people may use these products. because they can always buy original Ketron or yamaha styles. Ketron or yamaha themselves or third party created styles for ketron or yamaha.

The link you give says about style. but no about one software that can read and play in short, that style FORMAT. becouse if you pay the style you are free to play as long you not changed the format or sell to others.

If I misunderstand you or some one else please explain, or help me out of this!

[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-14-2010).]

Help yourself out, AFG... It is quite obvious you haven't done the SLIGHTEST bit of research on the topic. From the G70 owner's manual:



And that is from a simple reading of an online available manual.

You can't expect people to spoonfeed you information, if you are too lazy to find it for yourself, AND argue with them about it as well. Go and find some FACTS (not your own self-serving opinion) that refute what I have posted about the issue, and then we'll talk some more.

Ignorance of the law can be a dangerous and expensive thing. Just because piracy is widespread does NOT make it legal...

but on roland Va-76 orginal zip you have about 500 midi songs if i remember! what about that? what i read as you write here is again it can play the format. you're as user responsible for how you use that product.buy original styles or midi for example, but also copy. for copy roland says we are not responsible.

the same is with livestyler or varranger you get a software without styles. you can buy always orginal styles. livestyler and varranger are just a player. and diki do not get me wrong, I have nothing against you or others here trust me. I respect copyright thats why i create my own styles.


[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-14-2010).]

That proves nothing Diki.
I call those “Computer says no” responses.

Don't you think if such information did exist it would be considered extremely important and easily accessible ?



Well there's no point of flogging the subject much longer. You can't prove nothing because not one single company has the copyright information on their website, and I'm not going to change my stance that the data is royalty free until someone can show me a legal document that says otherwise.

I can throw down 5 bucks on a CD and find the copyright written on it more than once, but throw down 4 Grand on an arranger and nobody agree on anything because the copyright is not even available.

lol.... That's utter nonsense Diki.
Where on earth did you pull that crap from. Did you even read it before you posted it ?

If that's in a manual for your G70 then you better cancel all your bookings mate. According to the copright your not even allowed to gig in public with the keyboard.

james Perhaps he should hand clapping but instead of singing and playing at a gig, lol

Oh, I forget my bad english, maybe i read wrong, lol

This software starts to looks like vArranger

Isn't it??
http://www.varranger.fr/

By the way, audya styles without the audya sounds will not sound good... Ketron will not sells less Audyas because of the software arrangers.

They can continue working on what they are doing very good ! Styles and sounds !!

Bravo Ketron !

Dan

Jeez, you guys even HEARD of the word copyright before now?

For a START off, your live venue you perform at FOR HIRE has a blanket license (usually) that allows you to perform copyrighted works. They pay a fee, per year, to the licensing societies. If they don't, then THEY are in violation. As are you, for performing it.

Secondly, my quote was from the Roland G70 manual. And, in all likelihood, you read other manuals, you will find something similar.

Thirdly, if you had BOTHERED to open up any of the Roland songs and styles from their Zips, you would see a copyright notice in them. Mind you, there's a LOT of copies of this stuff floating around, some of it with the copyright stripped out. This does NOT make THEM legal, though.

Lastly, it is not the job of all these companies to place indelible copyright information on these works, although many of them try, but the copyright bits can easily be stripped out (once again, just because a third party did this, it does NOT make them legal), it is the job of YOU, the consumer, to try and find out if a work is copyrighted if you did not buy it from the original seller. If you look at originals from Tune1000, Roland, Yamaha, and many, many other reputable makers of styles and SMF's of songs, you WILL find copyright information. They pay the licensing organizations for permission to make MIDI files from the pieces, and pass that information on to you.

James, that link to Steve Demming's post is NOT a 'computer says no' response, that's the word of the Product Representative of Yamaha US, after being told so from Yamaha's legal dept.. Ignore it at your own peril.

Just because a COPY of Ludcris' new album was made without the copyright information printed on it does NOT make it legal. Either to sell, or use. And this is what you are claiming for copyrighted SMF's and styles. Just because it is commonly done does NOT make it legal.

But if you think it DOES, James, would you mind me contacting someone that you have sold your sample libraries to, and getting them to send me copies (with any copyright information erased) of all your library, because I simply don't feel like paying you a penny..? That's OK, isn't it? And AFG, better get set for a fight with James. He thinks he can copy your styles for free, if you decide to sell them. Apparently, sticking a copyright notice somewhere won't count as long as it is erased (or even there, as long as he chooses not to find it)...

I swear to God, the willful ignorance and deliberate lack of understanding on this topic shocks me. Doesn't ONE of you have any aspirations to make something in the music business? Because, if your puerile opinions about copyright is actually true, not one of you will ever make a penny. EVER...

Someone can copy it, sell it, give it away, distribute it world-wide, and there apparently isn't a damn thing you can do about it.

If this ignorance about the law wasn't so tragic, it would be funny...

Educate yourselves. Don't go around ASSUMING you know anything about it. You don't... If you decide that you don't want to take my word on the subject, go ask a lawyer in the field of entertainment and copyright law. Stop making things up just because it's the way you WANT them to be

BAck to the copy right thing..

Its all locall law, overhere in Holland you are allowed to make copies of anything for personal use.. So if i own a CD from Michael Jackson, i can copy the songs to my MP3 player, or make a copy of the CD in my burner to use in my Cars CD player..

Next to that i am allowed to mod everything for my personal use, like modding MP3's XBOX360's Playstations and such. SO its allowed to make a program that moddifies styles.

But if you can use a song on stage without paying royalties is a totally different question, if you use your song to play "achy breaky Heart" you're going to pay royalties for that. If you use the changed style to play an own number it all depends on how much different your number has become from the orriginal.

Whenever i use a style on stage to play Michael Jacksons Ben, i need to play royalties to the owners of the Michael Jackson label. If i use the same style to play my own song i don't need to pay any royalties. I never pay royalties to Yamaha for playing Yamaha styles.

So its no problem for me to use modified styles on stage..

You paid for Yamaha's styles when you paid for your Yamaha arranger. Buying the arranger gave you (and only you) the right to use their styles in any way you choose to (in other words, you can't sell them to others, give them away to others, etc.). You can use them for your own original works, you can use them to perform copyrighted tunes at home for your own personal enjoyment, and if a paid venue has its' license in order, you can perform copyrighted material from other artists live, on a gig.

Although you have the right to copy CD's and DVD's for your own personal use, you have no right to distribute, sell or make other works from the contents of those media. Pretty standard stuff, and all fairly well known to all but those who deliberately choose to NOT find out about it.

I am glad someone has a handle on the issue, here...

but with a dvd i am free when i pay the dvd to play with different dvd players or PC-laptop. but you say here if some one pay his yamaha style he is not allowed to play it with a software that can play the style he most have a arranger from yamaha. you sound like if i pay for a akai sample cd i most have a akai sampler, but i think if you pay the sample cd you are free to play it with a sampler hardware or software that can play the cd. when i pay a style i pay for style creation and not for style format, becouse the style creator is free to produce the same style in different formats.

[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-15-2010).]

and diki please read this about flie extensions:
http://trademarklawbriefs.com/?p=48

but yamaha Copyrighted his styles:
http://www.global.yamaha.com/news/2008/20080508.html

so, yamaha styles are copyrighted but not the yamaha file extensions, so user can use if they pay orginal yamaha or ketron style with ketron or yamaha hardware or third party software. if they create own styles in yamaha or ketron format they are free to use it with yamaha or ketron hardware or thirdparty software that can work with this 2 brands style extensions.

maybe i read it again wrong!!!!!!!



[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-15-2010).]

I wonder....how would you go about copyrighting a style?

I would think you have to record it first. Record it, submit the recordings along with the fee, and have it registered (if you were interested in proving copyright infringement down the road).

So what would you record? Take a standard "whatever" style. You'd record the 4 or 8 or possibly 16 bars of sequence for the major, minor, and 7th chord groups. Maybe diminished and augmented too. You'd have 4 variations of those and then the fills, intros, and endings (of each variation). And you'd have to do a great job of defining originality for each of those sections (again to prove any infringement).

I always thought copyright was to protect "whole" pieces of intellectual property, not "snippets".

http://www.wisegeek.com/can-i-copyright-a-phrase.htm

If a manufacturer does copyright each and every style....that's a heck of a lot of work to go through. I would think they would be proud to show you their copyright on request (IMHO).

-mike

Oops....I submitted my post, then saw the post from AFG and Yamaha's court ruling.

Answers my question.


-mike

did you read about file extensions to?

Got to read what I post, AFG. I have already said that, if someone PAID for his Yamaha style (or any other copyrighted style, sequence, whatever) he is free to do with it what he wants for his own use. If you bought a bunch of Yamaha styles to translate and put in the MS, no problem. If you downloaded them for free off of some site, then no, you DON'T have the rights to use them.

And if you bought a Yamaha arranger, you have bought the right to use all the included styles, and quite possibly (haven't heard from Yamaha about this one) any legacy styles that aren't for sale on their website. But new IDC styles, that you are supposed to PAY for in addition to your arranger's ROM styles, you have to buy those to get the right to use them (whether in a soft arranger or a Yamaha arranger).

You see, the situation is already bad enough with new styles being as rare as hen's teeth until the main manufacturers release a new arranger. As you will probably find out should you choose to try and market your own original styles, and as you can see from many of the confused souls posting here, most people seem to think that new styles are fair game for piracy, not understanding (or deliberately ignoring) the copyright issues. But copyright is not there just to make some fat cat lawyer a bunch of money...

It is there, so that, when you spend weeks, maybe months, making a great style that everybody wants, you can SELL it and make some money back for your time. But ignore copyright, and after the very first style you sell, that person can now give it away for free (or even worse, sell it and keep the money), and the people HE gives it away to give it away as well, and the next thing you know, you made virtually nothing for your efforts, and everybody has your style!

You don't want that, do you?

The same process also extends to the big manufacturers. Putting together hundreds of new styles for a new arranger costs a FORTUNE. In older times, you HAD to buy the arranger to get the styles, because that's all they played in! But in today's world of emulators and virtual style players, for everyone that downloads all their styles for free and plays them in a virtual style player, that's one LESS arranger the manufacturer sold, and a couple of thousand dollars LESS they made to help pay for the styles they had made. And sooner or later, this trend continues, they aren't going to make styles at all (or at least go back to making them ROM only, uncopyable), and the business, which is already on the brink, will fail completely.

It is, after all, what has happened to the music industry. Rampant copyright infringement has reduced the once mighty recording industry to a shadow of the profitability it used to have... And it is starting to happen, via torrents, to the movie industry as well. If you stop paying for things, they will stop making them (or make shoddy ones).

Who wants that?

diki:

asked Nobert about his software, his answer:


All style informations are from KETRON.

he wil soon, answer on this forum when the software is totally finish he said.

[This message has been edited by AFG Music (edited 03-16-2010).]

Look out for a post shortly from KetronAJ, to clarify things for you all.

James,

I have just realised was it me that helped you that MS, it could not go to a better home, I am sure we will see some results now, many a good tune played on an old fiddle.

Good Luck James

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 03-18-2010).]

[This message has been edited by Tony Hughes (edited 03-18-2010).]