Poll: Rate this product out of 5 (1 bad - 5 good)
Poll Options
View poll results: Rate this product out of 5 (1 bad - 5 good)
1
1 25%
2
0 0%
3
2 50%
4
1 25%
5
0 0%
Voters: 4.
#1
I was recently browsing the Internet, when I stumbled across this company http://www.ohmstudio.com If you guys have a minute check them out and let me know what you think about them in the poll.

Also could you imagine Apple bettering an idea like this???
Last edited by JohnNortonMusic at May 6, 2014,
#2
I like the idea. I misread everything right away, but I like it. Make it available to PC and Mac users. No sense catering to the smaller market.
#3
I've seen this before and have been intrigued. The only thing I don't quite understand is how you share between different people, who might not have the same plugin packages as you do? I could see this as being a really cool tool, but without breaking license agreements by embedding plugins into the project, I'm not sure how this is really a viable option for much more than collaborating with the basic plugins included (which I realize is what it's technically for... but it kind of limits it as a collaborative mixing package).

Quote by SkoobaStevens
I like the idea. I misread everything right away, but I like it. Make it available to PC and Mac users. No sense catering to the smaller market.

What do you mean? I just installed it on my iMac... Here are the requirements, as stated on their website:

Mac
Intel Processor
OS: 10.5.8 or later
RAM (Gb): 2 or more
Hard Disk Space (Gb): 1 or more depending on usage
Fast Internet connection recommended but not necessary

Windows
Minimum Pentium 4 or Athlon 64 (SSE2)
OS: Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later
RAM (Gb): 2 or more
Hard Disk Space (Gb): 1 or more depending on usage
Fast Internet connection recommended but not necessary
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#4
Quote by MatrixClaw
I've seen this before and have been intrigued. The only thing I don't quite understand is how you share between different people, who might not have the same plugin packages as you do?



I'm assuming that this would be cloud integrated. So the licenses, plugins, sound files etc. would actually be on the cloud. When you connect, you wouldn't really be running the program on your computer but simply accessing a central server's ressources.

Fun idea!
#5
Quote by flexiblemile
I'm assuming that this would be cloud integrated. So the licenses, plugins, sound files etc. would actually be on the cloud. When you connect, you wouldn't really be running the program on your computer but simply accessing a central server's ressources.

Fun idea!

That's what I was thinking... but at the same time, I'm not sure how this could be implemented legally?
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#6
well if all applications included (plugins, DAW etc.) are either home grown or free to use, what would be the legal problem?
#7
Quote by flexiblemile
well if all applications included (plugins, DAW etc.) are either home grown or free to use, what would be the legal problem?

I'm talking if someone in the collaboration group is using commercial plugins. The program supports VST plugin use.

It seems like the way this is run, you'd be limited to only using the included plugins or free plugins that can be easily shared.
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#8
Quote by MatrixClaw
I'm talking if someone in the collaboration group is using commercial plugins. The program supports VST plugin use.

It seems like the way this is run, you'd be limited to only using the included plugins or free plugins that can be easily shared.


As long as that person legally owned the plugins, where's the problem? While this does let someone else remotely control your mix, the software is still running on your licensed system.

I don't see the issue?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#9
Quote by Arby911
As long as that person legally owned the plugins, where's the problem? While this does let someone else remotely control your mix, the software is still running on your licensed system.

I don't see the issue?

The problem is that the person (who doesn't own the license) would be able to still use the other person's plugins (who does own the license). It'd be the same thing as sharing plugins, which is a large reason behind why the big companies have taken extensive anti-piracy measures. For example:

If person A inserts a plugin that runs on his system because it's authorized by an iLok, how does person B access this track and still control the plugin? Person A likely isn't going to leave his or her system on 24/7 for the program to be able to remotely access the iLok somehow, so they'd have to be taking the license off of the iLok, storing it in the cloud, and running the plugin without being physically installed on person B's computer. Sounds fishy to me
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#10
Who cares about the legal implications because it's a shit idea. Music sounds a lot better when the collaborations are happening in person, their is vibe created with people. Machines are no replacement.
#11
people misunderstand the reason behind this software. It is no replacement for jamming with other people face to face. it's for when you want to collaborate with someone and they are halfway across the world, or you need someone quickly so you send them the project… It's all about efficiency, not trying to replace human interaction.
#13
Quote by MatrixClaw
The problem is that the person (who doesn't own the license) would be able to still use the other person's plugins (who does own the license). It'd be the same thing as sharing plugins, which is a large reason behind why the big companies have taken extensive anti-piracy measures. For example:

If person A inserts a plugin that runs on his system because it's authorized by an iLok, how does person B access this track and still control the plugin? Person A likely isn't going to leave his or her system on 24/7 for the program to be able to remotely access the iLok somehow, so they'd have to be taking the license off of the iLok, storing it in the cloud, and running the plugin without being physically installed on person B's computer. Sounds fishy to me


No it's not the same thing. I can legally use a plugin on your system remotely, assuming you allow it, because it's licensed on your system. There's nothing in this software about sharing plugin licenses because that's not how it works, it merely allows remote access.

The reason remote access is legal is because it still only allows one seat at a time, you can't run multiple instances legally.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#14
Quote by Arby911
No it's not the same thing. I can legally use a plugin on your system remotely, assuming you allow it, because it's licensed on your system. There's nothing in this software about sharing plugin licenses because that's not how it works, it merely allows remote access.

The reason remote access is legal is because it still only allows one seat at a time, you can't run multiple instances legally.


Firstly, I think it's a great idea. Secondly, are we sure it allows remote access? The way I thought it works is that Person A records his bit, say guitar, uses whatever VSTs he's got on his machine to tweak the sound to his taste and then the resulting wav gets put onto the cloud/shared DAW. So each person is free to use his VSTs as he pleases, provided he has the license, with no legal ramifications. I'm not sure it allows Person A to control B's mix...
#15
Quote by powerhead
Firstly, I think it's a great idea. Secondly, are we sure it allows remote access? The way I thought it works is that Person A records his bit, say guitar, uses whatever VSTs he's got on his machine to tweak the sound to his taste and then the resulting wav gets put onto the cloud/shared DAW. So each person is free to use his VSTs as he pleases, provided he has the license, with no legal ramifications. I'm not sure it allows Person A to control B's mix...


"If you don’t know how to make it sound good, invite a friend or browse the cohmmunity to find a skilled mixing engineer… then simply watch the knobs move and faders slide up and down while the job gets done."

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#16
Quote by Arby911
No it's not the same thing. I can legally use a plugin on your system remotely, assuming you allow it, because it's licensed on your system. There's nothing in this software about sharing plugin licenses because that's not how it works, it merely allows remote access.

The reason remote access is legal is because it still only allows one seat at a time, you can't run multiple instances legally.

This is not how it works though. There is no remote access to another's system. From the overview on the website:

Quick bounce to make sure everybody hears the same song.

If you work with a third-party instrument or insert an effect plugin that only you in the project have, your partners will hear no sound from their outputs. However, all you need to do is quick bounce, which will render an audio file shared across all the members.


The program isn't saving any of the plugins or licenses, those are locally found on your computer. They're merely saving the presets you've used on them, so if someone else opens the project and plugin, the settings are the same.
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#17
Quote by MatrixClaw
This is not how it works though. There is no remote access to another's system. From the overview on the website:


See my post above?


Quote by MatrixClaw
The program isn't saving any of the plugins or licenses, those are locally found on your computer. They're merely saving the presets you've used on them, so if someone else opens the project and plugin, the settings are the same.


So no licensing concerns then, right?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at May 7, 2014,
#18
Quote by Arby911
So no licensing concerns then, right?

Sure - except it makes collaborative mixing worthless if you're using 3rd party plugins.

My original comment was mostly about how they'll deal with people using 3rd party commercial plugins being inserted onto a track and a second contributor not having access to said plugin. The answer is - they're not dealing with it, they're just muting the track if the person doesn't have the plugin and license. I guess you can use the bounce feature and render the plugin to the track, but that kind of defeats the purpose of collaboration and non-destructive editing.

I mean, this is definitely a cool program from a writing standpoint, but it has a long way to go if they intend for it to be an actual collaborative mixing suite. As it stands right now, it's basically just a way to lay down ideas and have others add to them quickly. I could see this being really useful as a tool for bands to write on the days they're not practicing in person, but without a way of offering full 3rd party plugin integration, it's only useful as a basic mixing tool, at least to the group of collaborators.
Quote by Dave_Mc
I've had tube amps for a while now, but never actually had any go down on me
Quote by jj1565
maybe you're not saying the right things? an amp likes to know you care.





www.SanctityStudios.com
#19
Quote by MatrixClaw
Sure - except it makes collaborative mixing worthless if you're using 3rd party plugins.

My original comment was mostly about how they'll deal with people using 3rd party commercial plugins being inserted onto a track and a second contributor not having access to said plugin. The answer is - they're not dealing with it, they're just muting the track if the person doesn't have the plugin and license. I guess you can use the bounce feature and render the plugin to the track, but that kind of defeats the purpose of collaboration and non-destructive editing.

I mean, this is definitely a cool program from a writing standpoint, but it has a long way to go if they intend for it to be an actual collaborative mixing suite. As it stands right now, it's basically just a way to lay down ideas and have others add to them quickly. I could see this being really useful as a tool for bands to write on the days they're not practicing in person, but without a way of offering full 3rd party plugin integration, it's only useful as a basic mixing tool, at least to the group of collaborators.


I see what you're saying.

Truth is, I don't know squat about mixing etc. so I'm not qualified to pontificate on what is or isn't a good tool, and as such I was restricting my comments strictly to the licensing issue.

I'm still not sure if it does or does not offer remote access? The blurb from the website that I copied above seems to imply strongly that it does, but I can't find anything else on it.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin