Posts by graphic4444

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says
8 bars intro alone

next 8 bars intro + high hat/kicks

next 8 bars all the prior, plus into/high hat/bass/

next 8 bars the “hook”/guitar/melody line

next 8 bars change up to verse 2 from chorus

Sorry, but… If the trance track has these “bars”, it is good or bad? =)))

Personally I like it, if it has say 4-6 sequential 8-12 bar different measures that sound different; usually it’s layered to build up… like bass first, then bass + drums, then bass + drums + melody, then change up to a different melody etc, then something else, then a closer/outro stinger at end… that’s good because I can chop it into measures/loops if I need for using it in production.

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

Thanks Scott, you make excellent points as always. Makes sense re standardized licenses have historically been in place across marketplaces for logistical reasons, since rf audio is a bit different that would be great if you could figure out a way to do more adaptive licensing; I replied to Faud’s email request re license examples this morning.

And let’s hope so, re artificially bumping lengths of audio tracks Should in theory hopefully not be a problem… but I know “people do what they’re paid for/rewarded for”, so that’s just a consideration to keep in mind.

Here’s a constructive suggestion along those lines of length, voice of the customer:

I buy a Lot of rf loop packs from the various loop producers (for use in acid etc); in creating their construction kits (usually priced around $20 for 10 construction kits), they layer element components to make up the final mix. Similarly, that would be helpful to me as a buyer, from what I’ve bought here many of the trance track composers do a good job of that, having 10-30 second layers that are added to, as part of the mix, as in:

8 bars intro alone

next 8 bars intro + high hat/kicks

next 8 bars all the prior, plus into/high hat/bass/

next 8 bars the “hook”/guitar/melody line

next 8 bars change up to verse 2 from chorus

etc, so that things are layered over time, the story being told a great analogy, right.. so as a buyer that actually is good, if there’s 3-4 minute tracks that have layered stuff added 8 bars or whatever at a time, to build the track… good example is this 7-min trance track I bought, the author fobee did a great job of building the track up via layers over time http://audiojungle.net/item/at-night/61206 and I can manually cut out loops to use as needed from it. That’s another idea is, like most other rf audio sites, offer :30s :60s full track loops as options re delivery vs just a single track alone, eventually, with pricing to match length for multiple takes, like the other sites have. Always a lot of work to do all that backend/cms mysql programming on the site to manage it though… keep up the good work.

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

Right, the single-track pricing is fine, the BIG issue is licensing, for use in single site only (which envato does), versus all the other places I buy from, where I can buy it once, use it in many different sites, which is what all the other companies I buy royalty free audio offer as an industry standard practice. It’s the LICENSING PER SITE limitation that’s a Huge price increase compared to when I buy from all the other places online, which give me the ability to put my audio tracks I buy in many different sites without having to rebuy the same track.

There’s TWO Pricing components:

a) the upfront cost to buy a single track (envato’s pricing is fine here, I agree)

b) the cost to use that track in multiple sites (envato’s pricing is the highest I’ve seen anywhere)

So allowing at least a use of the tracks I buy in 5-10 of my own sites, should be included; everyone else I buy from (google and check licenses for other royalty free sites), all don’t restrict usage to a single website per purchase. If I buy a track here, I have to re-buy that same track if I use it in even a 2nd website of mine, and that’s no good. If I buy a track at a different site, I can use it in unlimited of my own websites, which is how I’ve always bought rf audio tracks.

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

since moving to CS5 means I’d have to do an entire new win7 operating system upgrade from winxp install plus reinstall all my dozens of software programs, taking 2-3 days minimum, I probably won’t upgrade til at least next summer, most like fall 2011… and by then hey CS6 will be out. I’ll probably skip CS5 …also that’ll give microsoft time to work out all the compatibility bugs that win7 has with other programs… upgrading an o/s is not something I do lightly (first, I do it on my wife’s pc, lol, to make sure it’ll work, before trying on my personal work pc)

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

Sorry you’re absolutely wrong. EVERY other royalty free audio site I buy from, dozens, allow multiple usage of audio tracks across multiple websites. I’ve been a buyer of royalty free content for over a decade and am a professional in this area. Not to mention Envato’s top buyer. You on the other hand are someone with only 3 posts who’s bought virtually nothing here. I’ve spent over $7,000 here and am well respected. Please show some respect.

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

It’s not the price of the track, it’s the licensing restriction to a single site that I object to. I often have paid up to $40+ for single tracks. And as envato’s top buyer, I’ve spent over $7,000 here, I’m the most generous person in the world when it comes to spending money at envato. It’s not spending $16 for a single track I object to, it’s having to spend $160 for that same track if I want to use it in 10 of my sites. Make sense?

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

I’ve been a musician for over 30 years; personally I still compose for my roland D50 etc using pencil and paper sheet music paper (top 40, jazz tracks) ; then re-enter into software later… there’s something about being in front of a computer, vs being in front of my keyboards, that’s completely non creative in comparison… standing up and jotting down things on sheet music paper while between takes, during playing… is still the best way to get your best quality work done i think, vs mechanical uninspired stuff I see everwhere (eg from dweebs in front of computers trying to be musicians, vs the real thing, then transposing/copying into software lol)... and the Best inspiration, is to record your live performances for those that do them, in front of crowds, then transpose any adlib or other inspired passages you do in front of a live crowd, into software later. I miss gigging at live clubs, the energy, it’s great.

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

Thanks – agree. I’d responded to an email request this morning from one of the staff here w/links to licenses from other royalty free audio sites/envato competitors showing all the examples of how none of those licenses restrict usage to single sites; so I hope they change it to be reflective of industry standard practice for licensing royalty free audio tracks and not make it single-site only type licensing.

If anyone googles “royalty free audio” and then looks at the license agreements for all the other sites selling royalty free audio (most of which I buy from), I don’t know of any that restrict to single-site only; most of the big rf audio places just split it by usage, re standard (for you only, whatever you do with it), and mass-market (for those using it in 5,000+ dvds or other large-run production), and restrictions on no using them to resell them in templates etc.. which is reasonable.

But to say I have to re-buy a track for each site I use it in, is frankly noncompetitive and though I’m a high-volume buyer of envato assets, I have to keep looking elsewhere since I don’t like per-site usage restrictions because of the higher costs that envato charges compared to everyone else in the universe selling rf audio/ae projects/flash components etc. For those of us with a handful of 5-10 of our own personal/commercial sites we want to use content assets in, it would be good to see the basic/standard license be opened up to cover that.

I spend a small fortune on rf audio, and have for years, thousands a year worth. Just not here.

As you guys grow the marketplace to attract better talent and buyers, please keep these issues in mind, as one of envato’s top buyers, to keep me (and others like me who come here), I speak on behalf of many who would like to not have this extremely noncompetitive one-site usage only license restriction; at least open it up to 5-10 sites’ for basic license, for sites we run ourselves.

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

I could of course be incorrect about licensing everywhere else, and things do change I realize… it’s just from what I’ve seen, most places allow you to use whatever royalty free audio or other content without single-site restrictions. Is it possible to consider at least letting us use this stuff in up to 5 sites (or whatever number is fair) without having to rebuy the track every single time to use in a new video or site?

Thanks for giving it some thought,

-k

1395 posts
  • 7 Years of Membership
  • Collector Level 6
  • Community Superstar
  • Super Copyright Ninja
graphic4444
says

Hi Scott, thanks for a thoughtful answer, much appreciated. Agree re needing to payout higher commisshes to attract better quality contributors; remember too that “you get what you measure/reward”, so paying higher commisshes solely using track length as a metric will produce that behavior, eg the producers will all start simply looping tracks to make them longer for higher commisshes, which us buyers would see through and not buy, type of dynamic to be aware of; maybe combine a quality rating with the length to arrive at price is best.

A crappy quality 3 minute audio track should’nt pay higher commission than a high quality great sounding 2 minute audio track. Right?

The biggest issue for me remains envato’s new (since 2008) single-site license restriction on all content you sell, since nobody else in the world restricts usage of a piece of rf content to a single site that I’m aware of… since I like to use my content in multiple (of my own) websites, it becomes much more expensive big-picture to use envato assets for projects beyond an initial one, since I honor the license requirements and rebuy as necessary.

The licensing used to read as per here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20070208171530/www.flashden.net/faq/usage “You may use the files you download on websites, multimedia projects, powerpoint, internal systems and just about any other project not for resale. ”. Now your license restricts everything to “a single website” which makes pricing here the most expensive in the world, for those of us who buy tracks to use in multiple sites.

Hopefully you’ll give some thought to having licensing for personal use only (eg me for my 5-10 sites type of usage), versus for designers who can (and should have to) buy for each new client project, vs expanded/extended use rights (three tiers of licensing vs overly simplistic two license types). It wasn’t til ‘08 that envato imposed that single-use restriction via the then-named flashden site, and has since expanded that restriction to all envato marketplace sites.

When you look at all other royalty free photo and audio type sites, and I buy from most; the only 2 types of licenses are a) unrestricted personal-use license (eg I buy a photo or rf audio track and can use it as I wish in my sites, plural), or b) extended license (mostly for people who want to include assets in templates or for-sale products).

Envato’s new licensing is the most expensive in the entire industry, for those of us who want to say use a rf track in 5 different of my own different website projects, would require me rebuying it 5 times, which I don’t have to do at any other royalty free audio place on the planet, so that makes me start to move away from buying here, though I’d prefer to stay. Please reconsider licensing, to expand it to meet typical usage requirements like others, like it was back in 2008 and earlier at flashden etc.

The licensing point is a very important one, from a total-cost perspective, and my point is very valid, in talking with my colleagues who also buy royalty-free content. RF content as a concept is supposed to be just that, you buy it once and use multiple times, hence the title “royalty free”, without having to spend royalties for multiple usage… not buy once use it just once… then this is not a RF maketplace but rather a licensed-use marketplace, which is totally noncompetitive. That’s one reason I suspect sales have dropped off a lot (for audio especially) this last year or so here, as people realize that they can get tracks without a single-site license restriction everywhere else.

Please at least open up your regular licensing back to something less restrictive, like a regular license allows people (like me who run multiple websites in a single industry), to use a single asset in up to 5-10 of our own sites without having to buy multiple copies. Because for the $100 that would take here, I can go elsewhere and buy a collection of 8-10 tracks for $100 I can use unlimited times in All my projects (without having to buy multiple copies like I’d have to do here). And that’s exactly what I do, as I’m sure others do too, when they realize how restrictive the licensing is here. Per-use is incompatible with “royalty free”, unless a person just uses an asset once in their lifetime, and that defeats the purpose of buying a library of creative assets.

So your single-use license makes your pricing Completely and totally noncompetitive. If it was apples to apples… eg I spend $15 on a track here vs elsewhere, and I can use it in all my own personal website design projects/videos, then yes it would be fine to raise pricing here a bit. But until you make your licensing not a per-usage one, even charging $3 per track (if I need to use it in 10 different projects), is way more expensive than me buying the same exact track from a different company for $20 that I have unlimited usage for in my own projects, which is how everyone else in the royalty free audio (and other asset categories) conducts pricing.

Two main categories of licensing other sites that sell stock audio/other assets are include a) standard license (use unlimited in your own websites), and b) mass market/sync license (more expensive, if you’re producing 5,000+ copies of a mass market product or software that uses the asset).

But only envato says “buy it once and you can Only use it in a Single website”. That’s insanely more expensive than anyone else, regardless of price points. With a background in contract law, I’m very familiar with all of this stuff. Your licensing is noncompetitive with everyone else who sells rf audio (and other assets). I’ve never seen a single site selling royalty free audio tracks that says “you can only use it in a single website”. Frankly I’m puzzled, as that’s way out of line with what your competitors offer.

Now for amateur folks with a single website only, that might be fine.. but for those of us with multiple sites, I’d request that you reconsider your licensing requirements to fit our needs better (like everyone else in the free world who sells royalty free audio tracks does). I buy a lot of content via envato marketplaces, but if the licensing here stays at single-site usage, I’ll be migrating my buying back to other sites I used to buy from, because I prefer less strict licensing requirements, since you’re the only place that does that.

-k

by
by
by
by
by
by