John1984

I'll stand by both of those Magic 8-Ball predictions.

https://www.waves.com/news/perpetual-waves-licenses-are-back

As I mentioned before, Occam's razor suggests to me this is preparation for cashing out. It was a good 30 year run. I can imagine owners looking at the market, seeing boutique companies on one side, the consolidation on the other (PA, as an example) and look at Waves' wide and deep well of IP represented in their catalog, and just doing the simple math. Setting aside for a moment the rather substantial outcry on other forums and just looking at the non-response in that 375+ reply thread on their own forum, I am given to believe Waves' GAF button is good and broken. As many have pointed out, there's very little in the Waves back catalog that has not already been duplicated to some reasonable degree. What's left is just a matter of motivation, time, and effort. I'll amend my previous 8-ball guess and say it won't take a whole year. (This is me at the "acceptance" stage of grief.)

Yesterday I alluded to the point smallstonefan made today with respect to company valuation and selling. This is Step 1. Be on the lookout for a potential Step 2. Everything they can do to level cashflow and lower run costs boosts any number they could potentially get from an entity like Soundwide. Just wild-eyed speculation.

When it baffles to distraction how a company as old as Waves would make business decisions that are this divorced from reality at the ground level, I can't stop thinking about it. Generally, the people who own and run a business as large and as mature as Waves Audio are not stupid people; there must be an over arching driver (or drivers) to this. The more I step back and think about this, the more I consider the notion that Waves' joining the market's propensity to list plugins at an absurdly high "retail price" in an effort to persuade a buyer that 80% off is a good deal not to be missed (FOMO) was one giant misstep. It's one we see so many vendors -- in and out of music -- make every day. The problem with sales and heavily discounted promotions is you attract people who like sales and heavily discounted promotions. It is axiomatic that you get more of the behavior you reward. Customer loyalty is maintained so long as those discounts are on the menu. With so many options to purchase plugins, Waves became just another listing on someone's Deals of the Week. That does not promote steady cashflow. Moving away from retail sales to subscriptions does promote steady cashflow. There are lots of reasons to level out income away from the capricious peaks and valleys of the never-ending sales cycle. Anyone who has built and sold a business understands one of the bigger reasons.

To varying degrees, you've captured the general feeling one gets from reading a number of forums and the posts regarding this cluster. I'd put money on Waves changing course on selling perpetual licenses and WUP within 30 days, but I don't believe it's going to save this company. The problem, as I see it, is the pooch is as screwed as one can imagine. This was such a galactically stupid way of handling it from one end to the other. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd put $100 down on Soundwide owning Waves within twelve months. As an aside, if I were pro-tools-expert.com, I'm not sure I'd be that excited about having the scoop so very well prepared today.

That simply states that, as a consequence of either getting an update during the first year or in subsequent years as a result of paying for WUP, when you move from v13 to v14, you won't have two licenses -- one for v13 and one for v14 -- you maintain one license for the latest version. It's no different than when you take advantage of an upgrade offer; often the previous version cannot be sold. That seems fair to me.

Interesting. I actually see this completely opposite as you do. I would say it's the hobbyist market that is driving most of this business these days. Real professionals -- not professionally-minded people, but people who earn their primary living in audio -- aren't likely to be the ones trying the 1,922nd version of an LA compressor. They'll settle on one, maybe two that satisfies their requirements for a particular sound and they learn that one or two like they would have a hardware piece of equipment; no time or appetite to bother with more than that. There aren't enough professionals in this world to support vendors. Hobbyists/collectors have different drivers to spend money. They will be happy acquiring the 1,922nd version. They won't typically pay $199, but a monthly subscription to PA (or, now, Waves) scratches the itch nicely. And there's nothing wrong with that! Were it not for the hobbyists/collectors, the market would not be as large as it is. The downside is vendors are quickly coming to the realization that in a world where people happily pay each month to sample Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. they'll also pay to belly up to the feeding trough of 200+ plugins on PA.

I'd be especially concerned about this section: "Will Installing Waves Creative Access Deactivate My Perpetual Licences? Waves users who have purchased perpetually licenced plugins are still theirs to use indefinitely. Users who want to continue using perpetual licences for purchased products should consult with Waves support pages before upgrading to Waves Creative Access."

As Brian rightfully pointed out, until they don't. Seeing the landscape around them, it's not surprising they went to multi-tiered subscription. What I do find unconscionable is the manner in which this was handled, and how updates will (apparently) be handled. Frankly, the first thing that came to my mind was: the only way I can download, install, and activate my Waves plugins is the Waves Access app. As far as I can tell, I cannot download an archive of the installers, nor an authorization file. Given the way they handled this, I don't trust them to maintain access to perpetual licenses. Nothing good can come from this.

I'd argue that the Waves Update Plan was simply paying to support ongoing development efforts. I don't object to contributing to the cost of bringing new features and capabilities to plugins I've paid once for, whether many years ago or last week. Like the Pro Tools example I mentioned earlier, I can freeze my products and continue using them. If that quote above is actually Waves' new position on things, I'll have to wait to see how the subscription plan compares to the WUP I just paid for. Then it's a judgement call for me. Either way, my plugins will continue to function. And I will not buy into a subscription plan -- as someone else mentioned, I want to be able to open a session years from now and all of the plugins function as when I saved the project.

.

Days ago I chatted with online support, who suggested I write to Sales using their form; I got substantially the same response as everyone else. I own Waves perpetual licenses. Waves' Terms and Conditions page defines what is a perpetual license and what are the terms. https://www.waves.com/legal/terms-and-conditions Occam's razor suggests the "change in licensing" is more likely to be a change in the license manager/backend. Third-party sellers currently hold activation codes that were previously generated by the current licensing server. Changing the license management system would, necessarily, invalidate any existing codes generated from the previous system -- they would not validate in the new system. So, redeem codes in time for the changeover.

I view this a lot like I do Pro Tools going subscription. I've been paying my yearly support fees for many, many years on my perpetual licenses. Each year I update to the current versions after others have smoke tested them, and consider whether I can be content with the latest updates and freeze my system. Each year I renew. But at least I have the option. I checked this morning and found I was nearly two years expired on my Horizons bundle. WUP was $187. But I checked my upgrade offers and there was a bundle that included the Restoration bundle and Horizons -- $86. I upgraded and saved $101 on WUP and got the Restoration bundle free. And in one year (if WUP still exists, and I'll roll the dice it will) I'll have the same conversation in my head that I have about Pro Tools. If Waves goes subscription model exclusively, I will not participate; I'll be satisfied with the versions I'll have at the end of this WUP cycle and call it a day.

As mentioned, that 15% off is a one-time offer for new customers. 15% probably averages out at or below the cost of customer acquisition by other means, and referrals are more often than not longer tail customers.

I can suggestion one answer: I tend to agree with you that professionals have what they need. As products (or updates to existing products) arrive on the market that make more efficient existing workflows, or provide a true paradigm change in technology, pros will invest. From my perspective, the audio plugins and sample libraries and VST instruments market exists and thrives today because there are so many hobbyists participating. Without hobbyists, we'd find ourselves back in the Stone Age. And I'm not denigrating hobbyists -- I make purchasing decisions based on booked work, but I have a hobbyist side that I rationalize purchases for pleasure. Professionals tend to continue to get updated products and support because the greater market -- hobbyists -- pay the bills. Nothing wrong with that, everyone gets something that makes them happy. This apparent change in Waves seems to me more of a decision to keep margins in-house. I'd like to think someone, somewhere in Waves did the simple math on this. It may seem on the surface they are making a huge mistake cutting out 3rd party sellers, but it may well be that Waves' email list is large enough and generating enough return that it makes up for sharing revenue.

I engaged Waves support in a chat session a half-hour ago and asked this question. He did ask what was my source of this and I provided a link to Best Service's newsletter I received (as most of you probably did.) He was unable to directly answer and pointed me to a link to ask Sales. I did, and I am waiting on an answer. I avoid subscription-only. I don't view WUP as subscription; I've had my bundle a year and a half past its upgrade expiration date -- the plugins are as useful to me today as when I purchased them. Interestingly enough, though, I'm about to upgrade my bundle which will add a few plugins, but extend WUP for the entire collection for an additional year at a price less than WUP upgrade alone. I am happy to pay that.

I just verified that Samplitude Pro X5 purchased through Humble Bundle will open an upgrade offer of $149 to Pro X7 and $199 to Pro X7 Suite.

After installation, here is the list of additional downloads available to me:

(To get my thinking on this conveyed clearly, this ended up being a lot longer than I intended. There will always be disagreements on the foundational points involved in this topic of players and Kontakt's 800-pound gorilla status. ) I see this a bit differently. When I see the word "monopoly" I infer from its use some level of unfair coercion. I believe that the Kontakt platform is as popular as it is really comes down to so many sample library developers choosing to take NI up on a very capable platform provided at no licensing fees to use the full version, and (what I consider) reasonable fees to use the end user free Kontakt Player. Someone has to pay the piper eventually to keep the platform rolling on. Native Instruments has invested loads in Kontakt to cover design, development, and marketing. I know I make purchasing decisions based on whether or not the library runs in Kontakt. I don't believe I am alone. While sample library developers are a valuable -- and voluntary -- part of the Kontakt ecosystem, I believe we users are an even more important component of that ecosystem; we pay for Kontakt, either directly or indirectly. If we wish to take advantage of the relatively lower (or free!) price of sample libraries that utilize the full version of Kontakt -- those libraries for which developers do not pony up the conversion and licensing fees -- we purchase the full version of Kontakt. If our preference is, instead, to use the free Kontakt Player exclusively, we still pay for the privilege in higher library costs. Due to NI conversion and licensing fees covering the very real and significant benefits afforded the developer and user, the end user always pays the costs one way or another. That's just business. As to open standards, I would argue that the full version Kontakt does, in fact, offer as close to a open standard as we will likely see. If by "open standard" one means open sourced, that's different. Open source software tends to eliminate the built in competitive advantages that draw people to a commercial platform over another. And that tends to lessen or eliminate profits that are, in part, plowed back into improvements. The world is filled with tons of free, open source projects that haven't seen updates in years because there's no compensation other than a name on the credits. Good intentions and enthusiasm are rarely ever enough to sustain a development project. As a user, I am not all that jazzed that I sometimes have no alternative to using vendor developed players (Soundpaint, Vienna Synchron, Spitfire, Ujam, plenty others.) I have a much higher level of confidence that Kontakt will continue to be supported and extended over time because there is stream of income enjoyed by NI to cover the costs. So, when I purchase a sample library I am buying into an ecosystem that I expect to support my investment into the future, What are the underlying benefits for a sample library developer to not use Kontakt and, instead, develop a proprietary player? If it's an attempt to minimize the possibility of piracy, were it me I would have to compare the costs of that against the cost of using an existing platform that modestly charges for that service. There is still a considerable hard cost associated with building a proprietary player competitive with Kontakt's features (not only as a player but also having an existing market of scripting folks,) and an insinuated responsibility to maintain it for users who have invested in the platform. I've seen NI's conversion and licensing fees and comparing those to what I know are the costs of software design, development and support. I find it difficult to justify not using Kontakt. Why else? To bring this back to the topic of this thread, I am impressed with this library. I don't object to only being able to use it in their proprietary player because it is free to me. If I had to pay more than a nominal cost for the library, I'd likely pass. If I liked the library and thought I could use it on a project and it was offered on the Kontakt platform, I would be far more willing to pay for the value.

It was my first choice when the sale was announced.

If I had $25 as my budget and I did not already own it, TVBO is the easy answer. Otherwise, it would be the Rain Piano, Tubed Keys, ST Harpsichord, BOB Brass, and the Pump Organ.

I see what you did there.

I agree with you about Waves WUP. Another benefit of the plan is this: "With your Waves Update Plan, you receive any plugins added to the bundles you own, at no additional cost." I am viewing my upgrade cost on a large bundle that is a couple of versions behind and, while it is not insignificant, it does add 24 plugins I didn't get when I initially bought the bundle. Waves gets another pile of cash to continue business and I get additional value. For me I believe that's a fair trade. I think the article makes good and reasonable points. Part of the friction over this topic is, I believe, rooted in confusing "price" with "value."

The Native Voice libraries are very good and, at 40% off, a really good deal. If anyone may be interested, you can also get the Native Voice Complete Bundle with all four voices 40% off the regular $199 price, making it $119.40. And if you get it from Best Service using the discount code reported here, you can take another $20 off. I think $99.40 for all four voice libraries is an outstanding deal.