PavlovsCat

In 2017, Gibson, which had purchased Cakewalk Inc in 2013, announced it was closing down Cakewalk Inc. Of course, they would have loved to sell the operational Cakewalk Inc for a good price, but were unsuccessful. In 2018, Gibson sold the intellectual property (the rights to software code, trademarks, website domain, etc.) of Cakewalk Inc and some assets to Bandlab. Gibson did not sell Cakewalk Inc. to Bandlab, just some of the assets of the company called Cakewalk Inc. that Gibson dissolved. Also keep in mind that Gibson declared chapter 11 bankruptcy that year, they were in a terrible state financially. So legally, Bandlab wasn't inheriting the contractual obligations of Cakewalk Inc., they were buying the company's intellectual property and some assets, not continuing the corporation's operations. Basically, it was a fire sale and Gibson was selling Cakewalk for its parts, the most valuable of which, beyond physical property, was its intellectual property (i.e. trademarks, software/code, website domain, etc). Now here's another aspect of this worth considering, IMO. If Bandlab didn't purchase trademarks like Cakewalk and Sonar and the rights to the website domain, and instead only purchased the rights to the software/code, they might have just taken some of that code and created a new DAW and let's say that they called it DAWlab. If they did that then I bet it wouldn't result in people who spent $199 USD with Cakewalk Inc in 2016 on Sonar updates to feel that Bandlab owes them free product for the rest of their lives. Agree or disagree? Legally, Bandlab was not purchasing an operating business and inheriting their contractual obligations. They were purchasing SOME of the assets of a corporation that ceased operations the year prior and was, in effect, sold for parts by Gibson. One of the people who weighed in is a lawyer who acknowledged that a few pages back. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm a former Fortune 500 business strategist (director) who used to assess mergers, acquisitions and purchases of corporate assets and a former business writer -- so I have some degree of knowledge on this area. I have NDAs, but I'll share that one of the companies I once explored purchasing was Intuit. But there has already been one lawyer who weighed in a couple of pages back. He acknowledged that there's no legal obligation for Bandlab in this matter, but he feels that because Bandlab bought some of Cakewalk Inc's assets, they still have a moral responsibility to provide free software to those who spent $199 with the since dissolved Cakewalk Inc. back in 2016. I think it's very clear cut that Bandlab does not have an ethical responsibility to fulfill contracts made by Cakewalk Inc owned by Gibson and believe that any resentment towards Bandlab over that is misplaced and not ethically valid. I'm not saying anyone's resentment is invalid. I'm saying that Bandlab is the wrong party to blame. If you're going to blame anyone, it would be more logical to blame the former Cakewalk managers who created and approved that offer. Gibson owned Cakewalk Inc, so I suppose you can choose to be angry with them that they didn't make a success of Cakewalk Inc. Some here have stated they blame Cakewalk Inc or Gibson for doing a lifetime deal when they knew they would be closing their doors soon, but I don't think those assumptions are necessarily correct. Cakewalk managers very likely didn't have certainty that Gibson was going to shut down operations and were likely desperate to see that not happen, as they'd be out of their jobs. Most parent companies aren't going to share that info widely with a company they own. A more likely scenario is that the Cakewalk managers that came up with the $199 lifetime deal were thinking it would quickly infuse cash into the business that might persuade Gibson to keep it operational. It's entirely possible that Gibson didn't get involved in such promotions and wasn't part of the approval process for that offer. But,I don't know anyone from Gibson, the former Cakewalk Inc or even Bandlab, so I'm just basing that on basic business knowledge and experience.

When Bandlab first released Cakewalk at no cost, I researched the company a little and, from what I could discern, that they were building a social media ecosystem around fans and artists, kind of an evolved MySpace combined with music creation tools from start to finish for artists/producers. From a strategy perspective, I've found all of it really interesting. It was clear that they were in need of getting to the point of critical mass to make the whole thing profitable, but then, how were they going to make serious revenue off of it to make it all worthwhile? There are a lot of potential points of opportunity for revenue, and they've more recently started seizing some of them, ranging from the music creation tools from start to finish (mastering) to graphic art creation to copyright tools and services to streaming distribution services to promotional tools and services. Clearly they were going to need to establish a decent and reliable source of revenue at some point, but when and where has remained the unanswered question until recently (they have been pursuing other for pay services before now). It seemed rather obvious that they would likely begin charging for the creation tools at some point when they reached a certain level of users. I have been surprised they've went as long as they have without charging us for software or loops for that matter. I don't think they did it as a gift, they wanted to build critical mass. The tricky part is converting people conditioned to get everything free into paying customers. There are lots of potential ways of going about that, but, again, it's going to be tricky to convert a high percentage of people used to getting things free into people willing to pay a fair price for those same things. To aidan's and Keni's points, there are some folks who feel entitled to getting things of value for free and, when you give away your products or services for free for several years, it's hard for some of those folks to see the value of what they've been getting for free fairly. And I think there's another handful of folks that are bitter over stuff that happened with Cakewalk Inc that had nothing to do with Bandlab, but because Bandlab is still using the Cakewalk trademarks it bought from Gibson, it's a psychological obstacle for those consumers. Even so, that group of unlikely to be profitable prospects doesn't amount to a large amount of consumers, not enough to provide the kind of revenue stream I'm sure that Bandlab is looking for. Bandlab's greater challenge and revenue growth opportunity is going to be with a much younger demographic; the group the Bandlab product is now targeted at -- the market that NEXT will target. In any event, as some others have said, I like and appreciate Bandlab, and as long as they put a competitively reasonable price on their upcoming release of Sonar -- and don't move to a subscription only model (which I think is a bad move when targeting consumers; business buyers like subscriptions, consumers have a tolerance for a few subscriptions and mostly don't view software subscriptions favorably) -- so get that right Bandlab, and I will be a happy, paying customer.

And the truth is, I have sample libraries that are made from similar kids toys!

I have a ton of Cakewalk and Sonar projects that kind of locks me into continuing on that path (that is, I have my existing projects and I'm very familiar and built workflows around Cakewalk/Sonar), but I am intrigued by what Next has to offer and want to at least try it out. I suppose it interests me in the same way that trying Ableton Live, FL Studio and yes, even the short lived Project5, once interested me. Using different tools did result in my making different creative choices in some cases. Does anyone else feel similarly?

I really enjoy Mike's videos and his friendly style. It's interesting to hear his take.

Okay, you've made multiple very passive-aggressive posts directed at me. This thread is about Bandlab and your bringing up past threads is the epitome of "rehashy." You're spinning the Fluffy Audio story a bit. I invited the Fluffy dev to the forum after I made the thread proposing we could show a friendly resolution by Fluffy. Instead, the guy used it as an opportunity to call me names and lie about what occurred. But your using this thread to make personal attacks and then write a series of insults and follow it up with either a sarcastic I'm not "not attacking you." (or maybe you just lack self-awareness?) -- come on, these are among the insults you threw at me in the above post: "that high horse of yours gets old" "lacking humility," "hypocritical" "Thanks for editing down this post of yours I'm responding to, as it was initially needlessly long and rehashy." I get that you didn't like my post calling the anger or expectations directed at Bandlab to fufill the 2016 $199 USD update deal of a company that it didn't buy that went out of business in 2017 simply isn't reasonable and it's time to move on, but the fact is, it just isn't reasonable and I think you're taking the venom out on me a bit too far for my expressing that. I'm not denying anyone's right to be disappointed with Cakewalk Inc or Gibson. I'm merely saying, Cakewalk Inc went out of business a long time ago. That deal happened a long time ago and Bandlab did not buy and operate Cakewalk. They bought their intellectual property and some assets. Gibson shut down Cakewalk in 2017. The company Cakewalk has not existed after that. Bandlab didn't do a merger or acquisition. They bought some assets from a company that no longer existed. As I've stated numerous times, I can understand those who are upset with Gibson. I'm not saying I blame Gibson myself, but I understand how some people can blame them. I can understand why some folks could blame Cakewalk's management or Gibson, Although I don't think it's certain that the lifetime deal you bought was necessarily approved by Gibson managers. It could be that the Cakewalk managers that came up with the idea hoped it could have kept the company afloat and saved their jobs and Gibson had nothing to do with the offer. We don't have enough knowledge to validate the conspiracy theory some here have floated that Gibson managers knew that Cakewalk Inc was going to be dissolved and came up with the lifetime deal to grab as much cash as they could. I don't see any evidence that could prove that conspiracy theory true. However, Gibson did own Cakewalk when they went under, so that makes a lot more sense than holding Bandlab accountable for the lifetime deal when Bandlab had nothing to do with it and only purchased the intellectual property and some assets of the corporation after it ceased operation. Why did I point that I think people expecting Bandlab to fulfill a deal made several years ago by the Gibson owned Cakewalk Inc isn't reasonable, because of my sense of fairness and business knowledge. I think that some people making that leap might not be aware that Cakewalk Inc was actually no longer operating and its parts sold by the time Bandlab made its purchase. Cakewalk Inc. was dissolved by Gibson in November 2017. That was the end of all of the obligations of the company to its customers, it ceased to exist on that month and hasn't existed since then. Bandlab never purchased the operating company called Cakewalk Inc. It only purchased Cakewalk, Inc.’s intellectual property and some of its assets. Consequently, Bandlab never took on Cakewalk's responsibilities for any agreements or contracts, those were dead by the time Bandlab purchased the intellectual property and assets from Gibson. So, if one were to say owed them anything from the Cakewalk, Inc days, it certainly wouldn't be Bandlab. It would be Gibson. I would hope that armed with that knowledge that most reasonable people would set their expectations with Bandlab accordingly. I'd also propose that a lot of folks who presently feel Bandlab should honor the lifetime deal made by Cakewalk Inc should consider this: If Bandlab merely used some of the Cakewalk intellectual property it bought from Gibson -- say the software/code and some patents (I don't even know what or how many patents Cakewalk Inc held) that they used for the DAW to create a new DAW and called it DAWLab and made no references to Cakewalk or any of the Cakewalk Inc trademarks, I think the folks currently feel Bandlab has an obligation to fufill Cakewalk's lifetime deal they bought, would not feel that way. Because they would more clearly realize that Cakewalk Inc is gone. That it was dissolved and Bandlab is an entirely different company that just bought some of the Cakwalk Inc's assets. However, as Bandlab uses the Cakewalk trademark for their flagship product -- and will soon be using the Sonar trademark-- and they also use the Cakewalk.com domain, I think it's much more difficult for some folks to see the delineation between Bandlab and Cakewalk Inc, especially for those who aren't businesspeople who understand the various relevant concepts such as mergers, acquisitions, liquidations, etc. -- situations where a company purchases the intellectual capital of a dissolved corporation vs. the acquisition of an operating corporation -- and that understanding or, conversely, a lack of understanding of these matters, greatly informs one's expectations. Also, on a smaller note, if you're going to make personal attacks at forum members because you think they're high and mighty, arrogant and on a high horse, you might make a better case by refraining from using archaic 1800s high society phrases like "interminable screeds" in your take down. I'm just saying. Also, the brother thing right after you make an insult gets old really fast. You can leave that technique out next time.

This wins best post of they day.

I wouldn't consider my publicly sharing my negative experience of having no customer support from Fluffy Audio after several support requests were ignored for nearly a year and the developer lashing out at me privately and publicly for sharing that story and calling me a liar and making various defamatory statements is very comparable to someone feeling in 2023 that $199 they spent in 2016 with a company that went out of business in 2017 should be honored in perpetuity by the company that merely purchased the defunct company's intellectual capital (software and website) and has given away the software free for 5 years since purchasing those assets. (FTR, your spin is inaccurate, but that's a rabbit hole I don't want to follow you into.) Bandlab didn't fail to provide customer support and Meng didn't lash out and post defamatory statements at his customers, so I think you're stretching the boundaries of logic and civility with your cheap shot comparisons between you complaining about you spending $199 in 2016 with a company dissolved in 2017 and holding the company that merely bought some of its assets as comparable to a developer making defamatory public attacks on a customer. You feel a company that you've never made a purchase from owes you something simply because you made a purchase from a company that bought they only purchased the assets of from the parent company. You perceive that you were wronged by Bandlab even though they didn't purchase Cakewalk Inc, even though they've never made a cent of revenue from you and gave you free product, updates and support for the last 5 years. Somehow you think that's an honest and logical apples to apples comparison with my experience with Fluffy Audio? Seriously? I'm not denying anyone's right to feel disappointment over $199 USD spent in 2016 with a company that went under in 2017 that was dissolved and some assets were purchased by Bandlab, however. It seems appropriate to move on after that much time and considering actual facts over illogical emotions -- but that's just my opinion. In any case, Bandlab isn't that company you spent $199 in 2016 with, it didn't buy that company and it doesn't have a legal or moral obligation to fulfill any expectations that were set by that company, which Gibson owned and dissolved in 2017 and sold some of its assets to Bandlab in 2018. Just because Bandlab purchased the intellectual property and some other assets in a fire sale a year after Cakewalk Inc went out of business doesn't mean you can resurrect some $199 purchase you made with a defunct corporation and hold the purchaser of some of Cakewalk's assets to your agreement with Cakewalk Inc. That is not a logical business case or ethics argument no matter how many times you or anyone else repeats it and convinces themselves it is. To dubdisciple's above point, it would make a lot more sense to direct that resentment at Gibson than Bandlab. We've had free updates for the last 5 years courtesy of Bandlab. Bandlab wasn't continuing the business operation of Cakewalk Inc. I could understand if you're disappointed in Cakewalk Inc management or Gibson for that $199 you spent in 2016, but I don't think it's reasonable to blame the company that merely bought intellectual property of Cakewalk Inc after Gibson dissolved the company. If Fluffy Audio goes out of business this year and another company buys the rights to sell their sample libraries and I blame that company for things Fluffy Audio's owner said and did seven years prior, I think it's fair for you to call me out for not moving on at that point.

Wait, I have another analogy from my real life and it's funny -- largely at my expense. I called to audition with this fairly popular regional band that had gotten a fair amount of attention in the local press for being the next up and coming rock band out of Chicago (both of our major Chicago newspapers music reviewers echoed that sentiment, so I was pretty excited to get a chance to audition with the band) . I spoke with the lead singer. He told me that the original drummer of the band was quitting and they needed a new drummer and he wanted me to meet with the band, but told me not to discuss the drummer's leaving, because things were uncomfortable. So I saw the band at a very nice night club and thought they were really good. I was with my girlfriend at the time and I was praising the drummer so much she turned to me and jokingly said, "I can see that you have very strong feelings for him. I completely understand if you want to leave me for him. I won't stand in the way." So, I end up auditioning with the band a week later, was immediately asked to join and accepted. For maybe the next month, we did a lot of shows, and at maybe four of those shows, including one or two out of state, the former drummer would stand near the front of the stage giving me the finger with both hands and in between songs and would screen "You suck" at me in between songs. I actually responded by cracking up -- as much as it wasn't a pretty situation, it was so over the top bizarre, I did find it amusing on a certain level. But it was the fact that he did this at multiple shows over the course of the month and even traveled out of state to a show, going alone, drinking and standing near the stage just to give me the finger and yell, "You suck!" after paying cover charges of $10 or more that I started to have compassion that this was someone who was suffering. And the guy was so talented and wasting his time heckling me. I was less offended then I was sad for him. So I asked the lead singer back stage if the former drummer really quit or he actually the fired the guy (meaning, he been lying to me prior to that). I suppose I'm wired different than a lot of people, and despite that this guy was giving me the finger with both hands and shouting, "You suck!" I was confident enough that I didn't suck and this guy was just misdirecting his anger and disappointment at the wrong party. After all, I didn't know he was being fired, I thought I was replacing a drummer who decided to quit. I felt terrible that this guy was in such pain that he was paying to spend his Saturday nights at our shows to give me the finger and yell at me. If anything, he should have been upset at the lead singer. So, I did something unorthodox one night. In between sets, I walked over to him and told him to initiate a conversation. I was prepared for him to throw a punch at me. But he looked really surprised and a bit embarrassed when I walked up to him. I asked if I could talk to him and he said it was okay. I told him that I had no idea that he was fired from the band, that I thought he quit and told him how much I loved his drumming and how my girlfriend made fun of me for praising his drumming so much that she joked that she would understand if I left her for him. I think I bought him a beer after that, I remember that we made a toast to each other and laughed about what he did. He even told me he thought I was an excellent drummer and didn't mean it when he yelled that I suck. I told him not to worry about it, that it made for a great story and was kind of hilarious, but that he really should have been doing that to the lead singer. It was a really nice exchange, and I can honestly say that I didn't hold any kind of grudge against him, I loved his drumming and sincerely liked him once we got to talk to each other. I also gave him a pep talk about what a talented drummer he was to encourage him. It really seemed to cheer him up and I felt that we really connected at that point. Anyhow, the point of my analogy? If there's any party that it might make sense to be upset with, it would be Gibson not Bandlab. But I would also keep in mind that Cakewalk was just desperately trying to stay afloat when they made that lifetime deal. I wouldn't make the leap that they were intentionally ripping people off. Their managers that came up with the lifetime deal might have believed that it could have generated enough sales to keep them afloat.

Bandlab merely purchased the intellectual property of the dissolved company. To throw my hat in the ring with analogies, it's like buying a bike from a man who tells you, "I will give you free maintenance for your bike for the remainder of my life!" However, he ends up dying six months later and his son sells all of his bike maintenance tools to a neighbor. So you track down the late seller's neighbor and angrily demand that he honor the agreement of the now deceased seller of the bike. FTR, I originally was amused by the irony of someone on, I think, page 1, who complained about other people complaining. But by page 7, I kinda started agreeing with him when people came on to scream into the abyss who feel a sense of moral outrage (mis) directed at a company that merely bought the assets of a company that no longer exists that made a deal with them that didn't turn out as they hoped. Lifetime deals with software companies commonly entail a good deal of risk. When Cakewalk offered that deal, it was well known that the company was not in good financial shape and could go under. That's simply the risk one takes with those deals. But holding the anger and sense of entitlement against the company that merely bought the intellectual property of the defunct company is very misplaced. I get that you are disappointed over something that happened more than a decade ago, but it's old history. If seeing the name Cakewalk or Sonar triggers such terrible memories that can't be resolved after more than half a decade, I honestly think folks are better off just avoiding anything to do with the brand. But I also think that you're holding a grudge against the wrong party. Bandlab gave us all a product we once paid handsomely for at no cost for 5 years and -- OH THE HORROR!!!! -- now they want to charge us money for that product. I think reasonable people can agree that it is completely fair for Bandlab to expect consumers to pay to use their software. And if you don't agree, don't pay the price. That's your choice. I faithfully updated every version of top of the line Cakewalk products for every release since the original company's earliest years (I bought Project 5 and liked it and they abandoned that product pretty early; but I wasn't outraged and didbnn't feel it was some great injustice, I realize that it's just the realities of operating a business). I don't think Bandlab owes me anything. If they offer the new version of Sonar at what I feel is a fair price, I'll pay it. I like the company and I think there is a value in using a software product I know very well that I've built workflows around. But if folks are going to rant about perceived injustices when it's obvious that they weren't wronged by Bandlab, my sense of fairness/ethics does compel me to respond. That's all. I wish you and everyone else nothing but happiness, no ill will. And I hope that you will consider what me and others have written and be able to move on.

I don't think that is the best comparison. Waves was already bringing revenue in with a paid product when they thought they could make even more money by switching from perpetual licenses to subscriptions. Bandlab purchased the assets of Cakewalk from Gibson. Bandlab has not been charging for the product the entire time since they purchased Cakewalk's assets. They've been subsidizing the cost of the product and now they need to charge something for the product. I'm not sure what universe people live in where they find that problematic -- it' simply the way capitalism works. Bandlab, or any business, can't be expected to keep giving away product for free; they need to find a source of revenue, and even more, a means to stay profitable. And if anyone likes this company's products, they should want it to stick around, and that's going to mean the company needs to start making money. I've paid thousands to Cakewalk (12 Tone?) over the years, a company that has since been dissolved, but I've never paid a cent to Bandlab. People blaming the company that bought Cakewalk's intellectual property (assets) after the company was dissolved -- they're not the same company. Bandlab is the company that gave us what was, in effect, Sonar for 5 years, completely free. To those who say they're going to assess the paid Sonar against the competition, that's completely reasonable. That's what a company expects you to do. Someone made a very good analogy that expecting Bandlab to give you something for a deal you did with Gibson is like going to the new owner of a house to complain about something that occured with the prior owner. It defies logic. Just move on. When Bandlab introduces the new SONAR, each of us should assess it against other DAWs. That's entirely reasonable. But being angry because of Gibson's offer from more than half a decade ago that didn't pan out because of the since dissolved company's poor financial situation or being angry because Bandlab is now asking for money instead of giving you free product in perpetuity, well that's just not realistic and there is no ethical case that can be justified for that illogical position. Bandlab is a business and they need to bring in revenue (and eventually make a profit) to survive. IMO, Bandlab has been very generous and the venom some have is very misplaced.

The struggle is real. #BringBackTheOldOrange *FTR, I'm just kidding. I don't really care about the shade of orange.

When you buy a lifetime subscription, consider that it's more about the lifetime of that business, not your lifetime. Lifetime software deals are well known to be risky. You don't see too many smooth sailing software companies offering lifetime deals, so it can serve as a kind of red flag that a company is in desperate need of money. But there are no guarantees that any software company -- or any other company -- is going to be around for the next x many years. So if you do a ten year update deal or a lifetime deal, that is the risk any reasonable person needs to keep in mind. The company that you paid that money to is not Bandlab and Bandlab has no obligation -- legally or ethically -- to give you free product. I think most of us know what it's like to see a company fold that we've bought from. I've bought products with warranties shortly before companies have gone out of business. I've had customers go out of business before paying their bills. It happens. I wouldn't hold it against Bandlab; they had nothing to do with it. It's not reasonable to blame them and it's also pointless. If you're bitter, and you've already expressed that you are, do yourself a favor and vent over it and move on. If seeing the word "Sonar" triggers bad memories, just use something else and be done with it. I'm not saying that to be dismissive. I think it's clearly going to be a healthier choice for you.

It's actually the most common way products rollouts have happened since the 20th century. When a tech company announces a new product -- and I realize only NEXT is the truly new product in this case; for argument's sake, let's just call Sonar new -- it's commonly ahead of the actual product release, often by several weeks or more (Apple, in the 20th century, was greatly influential in shortening the length of new product rollouts; going from several months to several weeks). The major factors in the time frame to rollout a new product from the release date is greatly impacted / determined by investor expectations and market/competitive forces (the shorter the timeframe between an announcement and the actual product release, the less opportunity your competitors have to respond). You also do an announcement to build buzz for your product. You want the media to cover it and people to talk about it, to help build demand. A short lesson on marketing, as the vast majority of the public doesn't understand what marketing is -- and, in fact, a lot of small business people, including people with marketing titles at small companies, don't understand the basics of marketing (they're often just handling sales promotion, advertising, social media, etc.). What we are discussing here falls in the realm of marketing strategy. Marketing strategy encompasses what the father of marketing, Phil Kotler, referred to as the 4 Ps of marketing: PRODUCT (what you are going to make/product development), PLACE (how you are going to distribute your product), PRICE (what you will charge for the product( and PROMOTION (the P most of the public thinks of as marketing, the advertising, PR -- the hype; this is also referred to as marketing communications).

Thanks.I knew I could count on you for an honest opinion. I think you're right. Even though I'm not a big fan of the sound of the toms, I do like the bass and snare sounds and the kits are a bit different than what I have (SD3, various KONTAKT kits and AD2) and I did use the free version drum kit on a little recorded jam I did and found it fit quite well.

@jngnz I think you picked up DS Drum RCS Essentials by Red Pack Drums recently. I thought the demo / light version was pretty good. What do you think? Are you happy with it? Using the code brings the price down to $26.99 USD, for anyone interested. I still haven't pulled the trigger on it, and was thinking of picking it up today. My only hesitation is that I am not completely in love with the tuning / tone of the recorded toms that are in the freebie kit.

That was my first thought. If they go that route, I'll surely move to Studio One Pro. I wish they would have given us a projected release date, even stating a range, like Q4 2023 would have been nice.

It's not a big surprise that Bandlab is going to charge for the products. But it is a tough transition for consumers who are used to getting the product free for so long (granted, I had paid for SONAR and pre-Sonar Calkwalk products even longer). If the price is reasonable, I'm on board. I bought version 3 of Studio One Pro back when the Gibson owned version of Cakewalk was closing its doors, so I can always upgrade to the latest version of Studio One Pro and switch to that if I find SONAR's price too high for my liking (or they move to a subscription model). I'll simply have to assess the new SONAR when it's released. One thing is, I have so many unfinished Cakewalk projects that it may be easier to stick with Cakewalk/SONAR.

I'm not saying if it violates a policy, it just seems that this is targeted at educators and students (it's the Focusrite track for the offering; you can see it reflected in the questionnaire; so I wouldn’t be surprised if they end up limiting who gets the bundle by requesting college email addresses, but I'm just guessing). Beyond the educator/student question, I own the Fast Bundle and love it. I really think Sonible and Focusrite did a great job in making these plugins super user friendly and high quality. I can wholeheartedly recommend them.

Based on the drop down menu on the registration, it appears that this is intended for educators and students (as those are the two options listed), but there's no other copy that makes that certain.

That would be great. This is a really nice freebie. For those who don't own the full version of KONTAKT, keep in mind that this library works in the free KONTAKT PLAYER; you don't need to own any NI products to use this.

Hopefully, he's just enjoying his life or maybe on an extended vacation. Other things might have taken priority over buying more plugins and sample libraries. I think, probably because this group has a lot of older users, that if someone doesn't post for a while, folks can get concerned that they've passed on. Of course, I hope that's not the case. But given we have no idea, I'm going to remain hopeful that Abacab is doing fine and somewhere having a great time.

At VI-Control, Mario / Evil Dragon, a very knowledgeable KONTAKT scripter, posted "basically" as a response to someone asking "...all it does is add a reminder that Kontakt 7 is available?" So, yeah, this doesn't look like a worthy update. I'll pass. <EDIT> Just to be clear, I'm still grateful to @cclarry for his helpful reminders. So thanks, Larry. Unfortunately, I think NI using this update to do a promo was a poor idea on their part.

I just added some excellent piano, drum kits and percussion libraries to the list. Just a reminder, if you've just found a high quality mutlisampled free sample library that plays in a free player, please let us know -- post and share. If I don't already know about it and I agree that it's a worthy add, I'll put it on my list too.

Folks here don't know it, but antler and I have had a bunch of PM over time, so yes, it is true that I largely do pursue realistic sounding sample libraries of acoustic instruments, so yes, maybe I picked the wrong library to share my more general observation / critique of Sonixenima's freebies. I have just found that a lot of their freebies don't really give me enough of what I'm looking for to assess the full library. But to your point about this specific library, you are pretty much right. I probably wouldn't have been interested anyhow. Their string libraries are what greatly interest me, they do sound wonderful in the demos they've done and our own Simeon has done. I'm probably going to pick up their Legato Solo Cello library in the next sale they have and the freebie library for that one is actually not bad, but I do think they could also make it more compelling. I absolutely am not criticizing this developer's quality of work, which I'm guessing is superb and I'm certainly going to be purchasing some of their libraries in the future. But not due to their freebies, due to their walkthough videos and the walkthough videos of influencers like Simeon. Also, another KONTAKT sample developer I would cite as an example of doing taster libraries right is Xperimenta Project. In fact, it was after trying an Xperimenta Project free library that I became a customer. I found the sample quality, scripting and creativity of that developer's work was well conveyed in the freebie versions and that experience made me want to buy full versions of their libraries and everything I've purchased of theirs has been superb. Ideally, that is how the freebies work. They allow a sample user to experience a taste of sample library or a taste of the quality of a sample developer's work, and if the user finds that work compelling, they purchase. Some developers get that right. Of course, you may completely disagree with me on Sonixenima. And again, I suspect this is a superb developer. I just think they don't get the freebies right. But that is purely my opinion. Maybe you've tried them and found them compelling and made purchases. My experience and instincts lead me to believe that they can do this better.