Are Composers To Blame For GigaStudio’s Demise? Some Observations.

By • August 7, 2008

Consider this statement posted by a TEAC America employee:

Many people are still running machines with GS3 or GS2.5 – believe me! If all of those users had upgraded to GS4 we wouldn’t be in this situation.

There are lots of Giga users with more than one machine. For orchestral work (what a lot of FMM readers do for film and dramatic presentations), the average number of Giga computers for working composers has often been four, one for each orchestral section, and possibly  a fifth unit so that two computers can produce a larger strings section.

Unless you built a computer yourself (and so, discounted the value of your time in building it), the typical cost for a Giga system in the v2.x era was about $2000, not counting the software, the hardware MIDI interface, and the audio card. Add in that hardware, and costs easily rose $2500 – $3000 per system before either buying a new installation of GigaStudio or paying for an additional license. So for a multi-system Giga studio, that’s $12,500 to $15,000 in hardware before buying Giga software, and before purchasing any libraries.

SInce there was an audio card in every machine, that meant a lot of audio outs. Thus, a hardware mixing board was needed. Many opted for a Mackie 24-8 bus or 32-8 bus board. Factor in another $3000 – $4000. Others had one or more digital boards.

Then reverb. Not many could afford a $16,000 Lexicon 960L. And Altiverb wasn’t around. So the next best move was the “less expensive” Lexicon PCM 90 at $1800 or less if you could find one pre-owned.

Thus, the financial investment in a Giga-based production studio with four or more systems approached nearly $18,000 not counting the sequencing computer, nor the sample libraries, nor the cost of the GigaStudio software. Factor in the sequencing computer and the studio cost is up around $24,000, again, before buying the Giga software and any sample libraries.

Having spent this money for all this equipment and software and sample libraries, what the composer has created is a complete music production system.

This means that all the elements in a composer’s studio comprise an integrated system.

To restate more concisely, the parts of that integrated system were/are the sequencer, the Giga systems, the mixing board, the templates, the way the Giga systems are ordered and then what effects are used, and then the device into which audio was recorded into, not infrequently, a separate Pro Tools system. Nor have we factored in other items like house sync, VCRs, etc.

When viewed from this perspective, it’s evident that there was no such thing in a composer’s studio as “just” upgrading, especially when considering that a composer’s orchestral template running 100-200 tracks governs multiple machines.

If a software update is buggy, then one or more elements within the system can be shut down, which in turn, shuts down music production.

When a composer’s production studio is shut down, cash flow is shut down.

So before a composer upgrades, a decision must be made to determine if the upgrade is really worth it, and if with that upgrade, what might happen in the studio afterwards. This is a hard enough question to answer with software that’s got a great reputation for stability.  But it’s an even more difficult question to answer for software that has a reputation for being buggy.

Many posts on public forums pointed out that GigaStudio software had issues.

Add to this the shutting down of communication between Tascam and the Giga customer base before GigaStudio 3.0 was released. Tascam closed down the forum and stopped sending out newsletters. Tech support was poor.

A business question: where was the basis of trust for the composer to upgrade?

By literally shutting down communication, Tascam eliminated trust between the user base and the company.

So why should any composer have risked upgrading to GS3 or to GS4?

Being a PC only product, a fair question was posed to the Giga people prior to the release 3.x: could a basic PC parts list be made available so that stable systems could be built. A company response to that request was made to several hundreds composers at a Society of Composers and Lyricists event at the L.A. Film School (which I was there to hear) where it was said that, “PCs have many options so it’s hard to…” The audience, made up largely of composers,  responded by booing and hooting at the Tascam presenter.

So, without a recommended parts list to start with, how could a composer or a system integrator build a system that worked effectively when the most basic level of information wasn’t avilable from the OEM?

It’s not possible unless the system integrator, and the user base, does the R&D product testing and shares the information.

Then, prior to the release of GigaStudio 3, Tascam made a decision that affected all sample library developers.

Sample developers had asked Tascam to create a copy protection mechanism so that their samples in GS3 would be protected. After all, Tascam had copy protection for GigaStudio. The developers needed it, too. But Tascam decided no, there would be no mechanism for protecting the library developer’s samples because it interfered with the customer’s ability to do creative programming.

When Tascam made that decision, as it was publicly well known at the time, EastWest chose not to develop the Quantum Leap Symphonic Orchestra in Giga format. Instead, they developed QLSO and many other popular libraries using Native Instruments’ Kompakt player, where after installation, the samples could then be used in Kontakt for more customized programming and manipulation by the composer.

Tascam listened to other voices who were vocal in their position and published posts in public forums supporting the no-copy protection approach for samples. it was from this discussion that the term “romplers” was coined.

Other developers voiced the opposite position in the public forums by describing how adding copy protection to their products had improved sales and that they could produce the sales stats to prove it.

But the testimony of the experienced was ignored.

So one by one, eventually all the major developers stopped developing new product for the GigaStudio format.

New libraries are a primary reason to upgrade. But when the majors turn away, that’s a market message.  And so what were composers supposed to do? Upgrade to a software program that was no longer being developed for?

With so many poor marketing decisions one wonders what the leadership in the TEAC executive suite must have been thinking.

Did they really understand the company they bought and the nature of this side of the music industry? Was GigaStudio so small and other business interests so profitable that it wasn’t worth their time to focus on this product?

Could TEAC leadership have done anything before it was too late?

I think one answer came this past week in an e-mail many of us received from Gary Greenfield, CEO of Avid.  Here’s part of what he wrote.

Over the last six months I have had the pleasure of visiting and talking with hundreds of customers and business partners around the world. I have learned a great deal in that short time, and heard one very clear theme: Avid needs to do a better job of listening to our customers and developing solutions that truly meet their needs.

Look what Gary Greenfield did: he visited and he talked. He didn’t sit in his office in Tewksbury looking at reports. He went out and met with his customers.

What Gary heard nose to nose is exactly what GigaStudio customers were saying to TEAC America on the public forums: you’re not listening to us and you’re not developing solutions that really meet our needs.

Part of the secret of product development is understanding product use.

Walking into hundreds of studios and seeing the kind of system integration composers had would have shown TEAC executives that composers were using GigaStudio the same way they were using the hardware Emulator E4s.

Consequently, while GS3 with GigaPulse was a brilliant achievement, maximizing the new features required a new way of working that represented a change in system operations in the music production process from how composers were using GigaStudio up to that point.

To motivate composers to make a “system change” with Gigastudio 3 from the way they were already working with Giga 2.x, Tascam needed a much different sales approach.

Selling the new features and uses required, at minimum, top flight training with print and video for the simple reason that Gigastudio 3 was so feature rich that it was not intuitively obvious what the next steps were in the production process with all these new features.

GS3 featured a convolution reverb that used a complicated “wizard” to add new files called Impulse Responses (IRs) instead of using a drag and drop routine.  The iMIDI rules lacked clear explanation which was a serious oversight when you realize that the iMIDI feature replaced the majority of the Vienna Symphonic Library’s Performance Tool.

Unfortunately a GigaPulse manual wasn’t released until one year after GigaStudio 3 had been released.

How many thousands of upgrades might have been created if those brilliant new features had the printed tutorials needed at time of release along with a caliber of video training similar to what Vienna used to launch their Vienna Instruments player?

With GS3, Tascam licensed VSL files that were included with the Orchestra version of GS3. Here was yet another wonderful marketing opportunity. What better tool to demonstrate the power of the newly added GigaPulse section then the Vienna library. Since the Vienna library was recorded in the center stage position, it was ideal for GigaPulse demonstrations.

For example, with one portion of GigaPulse, you could position the strings using the mic positioning feature. You could create a custom sound using the new Mic emulation feature which was really excellent. Then you could apply the convolution reverb, or, route another reverb into GS3.

All of these were enormous problem/solution features for thousands of Vienna users which made Giga 3 both a compelling upgrade and a viable new purchase.

But where was the explanation? Where was the documentation? Where were the videos? Where was the training to explain this new production paradigm shift and how to use it needed not only to upgrade, but to buy the newer P4 systems?

In short, where was the incentive for composers to upgrade to GigaStudio 3?

So composers asked a business question: since my system is working, why risk upgrading?

Instead, money was invested in new machines running programs taking advantage of the Kontakt technology from Native Instruments. Kontakt was dual platform which simplified system integration issues for composers.

Then Vienna released the Horizon libraries which worked with Kontakt, the EXS24, HALion and GigaStudio. But if you got the Kontakt version when K2 was released, Vienna’s Performance Tool was completely eliminated thanks to the new scripting technology.

Then came the announcement of the new Vienna Instrument and that VSL was ceasing support of all other sampler formats. When the Horizon libraries, the First Edition and Pro Edition were sold out, that was it for Giga formatted products Vienna. All new activities focused on their Vienna Instrument player and their virtual mixing board, the Vienna Ensemble.

As we know, EastWest later decided to create their own software instrument, PLAY. Within the past few weeks, SONiVOX has announced that they’ve had a secret “skunk works” of programmers developing their own new dual platform software instrument that’s expected to release in early August

When the sequence of events is reviewed, it’s easy to understand why more composers didn’t upgrade. And it is true, if more had upgraded, GigaStudio, an innovative pioneer software program that forever changed how we produce music, might not have died.

Are there lessons to be learned from all this? There are a few.

1. What customers really want is a musical IBM mainframe, they just don’t know how to articulate it. Customers want to do everything on a single system. That’s a mainframe. They want to install software, and they want it to work. And they want fundamental training. The problem is that the music technology sector isn’t modeled after IBM, it’s modeled after the mini-computing concept where you get stuff that’s early and not debugged, but cheap. That’s the Silicon Valley way. Reference: Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance by Lou Gerstner, past president of IBM. If you want to understand why things aren’t working right, read the book.

2. Everything a developer must do with music technology software involves interoperability. The software has to work with everything. You can’t develop in a void. Even if a new program is only designed for one computer platform it has to work with all the other programs on the same platform, unless you’re really confident that there are enough customers to financially justify only developing for one program on one platform.  Otherwise, it’s a dual platform world, and while a majority of the pros are on the Mac, the rest of the world is on the PC. And that’s a big world to ignore. The one thing customer’s don’t care about is that developing right now is messy given the transition happening on both Mac and PC platforms. They want it right and they want it now.

3.  Know the size of your market. This is critical because a developer will only achieve x% penetration of a sequencer’s and now notation program’s customer base. Before they were purchased by Yamaha, Steinberg used to tell people they had over a million installs. One day when Cubase 5 was hot  (this was before SX), a notice was posted on the Steinberg web site asking customers to be patient as 60,000 customers were expected to download the newest Cubase 5 update. 60,000?! What about the other 940,000? A 10% sales penetration of 60,000 customers, worldwide, is 6,000 units. But if you thought the base was 1,000,000, then a 10% penetration is 100,000. Right off the bat, sales projections, and consequently the money invested in those sales projections, can be way off. The update numbers are also important because you also have to decide how backwards compatible the product may have to be and what kind of tech support issues will be encountered as a result.  All this factors into the development cost. You have to know your numbers to know if you have a chance to get your money back.

4. Expect and plan for competitors. This is where so many companies mess up! They think that their product is so vital, so important and that they have such customer loyalty that they have no competitors. Wise up! If you’re doing something great and innovative, plan for competitors. When GigaStudio got successful, Steinberg came out with HALion, Emagic came out with the EXS24, and Native Instruments came out with Kontakt. At first, none of these products were GigaStudio’s equal, but they each had an important product feature Giga lacked – they could run within the sequencing programs their parent company’s sold, and Native Instruments made it a product feature to run on both platforms and all the major sequencing programs.

4. Beware the danger of becoming too feature rich. In Marketing High Technology, author William Davidow makes the important observation that once a technology has peaked, all you can add are features. The more feature rich a product becomes, the more time consuming it is for people to learn. If a program is super feature rich, many customers may opt to not upgrade, feeling they haven’t gotten everything out of the first investment they’ve already paid for!

5. Call your customers and find out how they’re using your product or the product you plan to develop for. Get on the phone and pull a random sample out of your registered user list and call to say hello, ask how they’re using your product and what improvements they’d like to see. Find out what kinds of projects they’re using your products on and what kinds they aren’t using them on. Between 10 and 20 conversations and you’ll often start seeing a trend.

6. Support people who support you. Thanks is a seriously neglected form of compensation. There are plenty of people around who love to say hurtful nasty things on forums. But there are a few who stand up for you, your company, and your product. When they do, show some appreciation with a personal note. It could be a great way to turn a perceived “enemy” into an ally.

7. When there’s a problem, say so and fix it fast because you can’t hide. Someone in the political world sneezes and it’s on the news and in a bunch of blogs. The blogosphere hasn’t yet hit music technology that way, but forums sure have. Even if it’s “pilot error” a little blood and the sharks show up! Unfortunately, instead of writing the company directly about whether an issue is or isn’t a problem, the customer trend is to complain on forums first which puts you and your company on the defensive.

8. Support retailers who support you. Developers forget that it costs money for a retailer to advertise their programs. The web isn’t free. Programmers have to be paid as do assistants who update the web sites. It also costs money to dedicate computers in the store for product demos. Then store personnel have to be trained on your product. If your product is so feature rich that it takes a lot of time to learn, you’ll never get an effective instore presentation because the turnover of sales personnel is so high.

9. Read. At least Business Week. Reuters and the NY Times are free online. Good to Great should be in every developer’s library. You can’t just develop in isolation. You need to see where the world’s at and where you fit within the larger context to understand trends and where the industry is going.

10. Learn to build effective relationships. This is a hard thing in music technology because the skill it takes to create a product isn’t often the skill that builds the relationships needed to sell the product. Sometimes the inventor is really better off staying in a cave and letting someone else do the selling. Get it out of your head that it’s good enough if the product is great. It’s not. More and more we want relationship to go with the product and part of the new sales task is understanding how to do that. No matter how great your product is, bad relationships with the customer base will negatively impact your sales.

11. There’s a skill for developing a product and a separate one for teaching it. Developers are not always the best teachers of their own creation. The time spent finding and paying someone to create strong training and tutorials for your product is worth it. I’ve never met a professional who complained about a product being easy to learn and use.

12. Avoid the sin of Hubris. Charles de Gaulle once said, “The graveyard is filled with indispensible men.”

In closing, a lot of people put in a lot of time, effort and cash to keep Giga going.  It helped build a lot of careers. Thank you.

Comments

By Chris Alpiar on August 7th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Wow, that is quite an article Peter! THANK YOU for saying most of what is on my mind right now as far as Teac is concerned. As my studio is completely based on GigaStudio technology and I was half through my upgrade to GS4 path when this bomb dropped I can’t tell you how disappointed I am. For me personally, I lost faith in GS when I moved from 2.5 160 to GS3 Orchestra and when the support wasn’t just poor, but downright mean and rude. I explained the problems and was given stock replies without having had listened to a word I had said. I was told the fault was mine when it wasn’t and I was even hung up on by one representative. Oh yea I was pissed then. But after several months of bringing my productivity to a screeching halt, I found a way (using that ram hack tool) to keep my GS3 machines up and running and only crashing occassionally. And so I was back to working and while there was always an internal stress on if GS would crash or not it worked overall ok and of course the features like GigaPulse, the 8 ports, the great sound quality, well they all added up to keeping it going. But the journey of joy with 2.5 now became a constant stress and if I had a problem and called Teac support, 99% of the time I would get like 15 rings and then a message saying sorry and a hang up. I once tried to call Teac Support 27 (Twenty Seven) times over 3 days and never got through.

Well let bygones be bygones, I am an artist and had to not dwell or my art would become like music for Macbeth hah. So GS4 came out and I guess I am just a crazy person, but I went and bought 2 copies of xp64, new hardware to support it and then I made the decision to upgrade only 1 of my GS machines (good choice!) so I did it and HOLY COW the new features are really really amazing!!! I mean REALLY amazing! I was so blown away and sooooo excited. I made a performance and used 99% of the 4 gigs of ram on the first upgraded machine and it was pretty stable! I made stacks of VSL Pro Edition sounds as if I were recreating Vienna Instruments inside of GS4 and set up all my keyswitches. But there are still some really serious problems with this release. Of course with 4.0 there was some rediculous things llike that “upgrade to GS4 format” in the QuickSound librarian that totally destroyed all my samples (luckily I was able to install the full VSL full pro edition again :P) and also some weird issues where the “input channel” selects randomly (seemingly) changing in the middle of working on a composition, re-routing all the sounds to the wrong channels. Then manually having to switch each one (of fully loaded 8 ports!) and then clicking on one randomly and BOOM blue screen of death. Lots of little buggy things like that. It was then I realized I made the right choice to not upgrade both. I told myself “you know you should have expected it after all the crap you went through with upgradeing gs2.5 to 3!” SO I have been waiting, going daily to tascamgiga.com for the STABLE release of 4.02 which will fix this. I guess it will never come.

I am not rich and I cant just throw away VSL Full Pro edition and 2 gigastudio machines with nice RME cards in the garbage and go a different route. What do you think will happen? Will we see a company that actually knows how to develop and release software within our industry picking up GS? Will it go open source like Larry Seyer is pushing for? Or will I just be screwed and my studio become obsolete?

By Chris on August 7th, 2008 at 3:48 pm

Peter,

I think you nailed it! I think you can break down the details of what you said into 3 basic things (or at least this is how I have always felt). 1) Tascam clearly does not understand the software market. 2) A high end Giga system was challenging and expensive to build and troubleshoot and there was little help from Tascam in finding what parts make the perfect Giga machine or resolving software issues. 3) Some users (myself included) didn’t feel the need or see a great reward in following their upgrade path (although maybe there were rewards that weren’t marketed to users properly). I personally bailed on upgrading Giga after 2.5 because I thought Kontakt (and NI in general) just had there stuff so much more “together” and I absolutely hated the complexity of Giga (2.5), although I could see why many people liked and stuck with it. I switched everything over to Kontakt and ran my Giga 2.5 systems “as is” until they died of old age. I continued running them just so I could still use the Vienna performance tool-which as you pointed out would not work in K2. Sometimes it’s wise not to be on the bleeding edge of technology-actually I’d say more often than not it’s wise to wait a bit for things to shake out before upgrading any piece of software.

I think the universal lesson here is “know your client, know your business”. My personal feeling is Tascam simply doesn’t know their client or the business of music software and were finally able to admit that to themselves. Fortunately for composers, at least there are many other options for software sample playback and editing. Back when Giga 2.5 was out, they were the only game in town (I’m not counting Sample Cell). I really hope anyone who upgraded to Giga 4 finds a stable version to run sometime in their near future or gets all their money back.

By David Das on August 11th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

This article is very good but only scratches the surface of the complicated issues involved. For example, Tascam also promised Mac support was “months away” for multiple years, but it never materialized. That builds ill will among a user base which has a good proportion of Mac users.

Native Instruments cemented Kontakt’s long-term dominance by running an effective marketing strategy to get lots of high-end libraries in their format. The Kontakt/Kompakt Player model, I think, played a vital part in Kontakt’s success and enabled it to eclipse its competition.

EXS is such a viable sampler platform, but Apple’s neglect of it (which is hardly surprising) is insuring that it will probably never regain the status it deserves. (Hardly any sample companies develop modern libraries for it anymore, and its features are now far behind the leaders of the pack. However, it is a rock-solid sampler and could be modernized fairly easily if Apple gave it some TLC.)

By Nick Batzdorf on August 13th, 2008 at 10:49 am

What Professor Das says, and I’d add that Kontakt started out as a plug-in, co-existing, more prosumer-friendly sampler, which opened it up to a much wider audience. Then they made it stream, licensed players, and then K2’s legato scripting in particular really steepened the slope for Giga. NI had a target to beat; the pioneers are the ones with the arrows in their backs.

So I enjoyed the requiem and details of the investment for composers using Gigas, Peter, but my expert analysis is simply that Giga went under because the cost of developing and maintaining it doesn’t match up with the potential revenue. One of the companies that developed their own players would have bought it for next to nothing if that weren’t the case.

Meanwhile, Giga transformed the whole field of sampling. JVB and friends made a monumental contribution to our world, and I hope they’re proud of that even though the product came to an end.

By Nick Batzdorf on August 13th, 2008 at 10:52 am

Oh, and I should add that Giga created an entire new musical medium.

By Clancy on August 15th, 2008 at 10:16 pm

As a giga 3.0 user (lover 15% / hater 85%) and a software developer in another industry, I just wanted to compliment the author on those 12 steps. Those really apply to all fields, not just music. Got the makings of a great book there, I really think the specialty / niche software markets could use some sage advice.

By Jim Van Buskirk on August 22nd, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Nick Batzdorf wrote
“Meanwhile, Giga transformed the whole field of sampling. JVB and friends made a monumental contribution to our world, and I hope they’re proud of that even though the product came to an end.”

Thank you very much Nick for your kind words. Amongst the laundry list above of everything that was ‘done wrong’ after the NemeSys days, it’s nice that you and others remember the core innovation. That part never stopped, believe it or not, for those who actually found out about it. We did ‘spectral morphing’ technology in GS4, to replace ‘stair-step’ sampling, and Portamento formant shaping, among other things…like using 64bit memory..and I hope y’all have a chance to hear that in instruments like Mark Belbin’s (Wavelore) Pedal Steel, Larry’s Drums, and Sonivox’s slide Trombone…. The artists who created the libraries, those who used them, and who took the thing and ran with it…that’s really where it all mattered. Thank you for your support!

By JOhann ROon Salzman on September 22nd, 2008 at 4:02 pm

it was indeed a sad day when i heard that GS was dying. It was my favorite software of all time and it sounded great.

Perhaps, to resurrect the platform, and I would like to see, the code open source so that it can continue to grow and private persons can continue to share home made libraries for it.

I have many giga libraries that i have learned to play. It can take as long to learn how to play a sample as it does the real instrument sometimes. I will continue to use gigastudio, and if anyone wishes to create libraries for the software, i shall support also.

I am so thankful to nemysis for bringing music into my life with gigasampler and gigastudio.

By Brett Houston on October 24th, 2008 at 8:46 am

Great article!

Teac is squarely to blame, they were upside down from the beginning. You nailed it when you said they didn’t listen, (to anyone) from there it was all downhill.

Building a computer for a giga, that actually worked correctly, was more complicated than brain surgery on a squirrel with chopsticks. If they couldn’t give you a map of a system that would work with their software, they should have made and packaged one of their own that would run it, they missed a huge opportunity there. Composers want to compose music, not deal with technical nightmares.

They had a good run, they broke some ground, the torch has passed. I can’t say I’ll miss all the frustration. Kontakt had them DOA out of the box, not that they have it all together either….

By john on February 21st, 2009 at 1:27 pm

Hi

One word

(well two – copy protection)

Why would any developer put up there library to Giga when it can be instantly copied over the net?

Anyone who invested in such librarys (includes myself) were probably supporting a huge amount of stealing so I don’t blame VSL etc for moving away from the platform.

GS4 is still the best host out there when compared to the competition

By Ray L Phenicie on May 25th, 2009 at 7:18 pm

What caused that epic drama, The Demise of GigaStudio?
In four words, support your end users.
There is so much more behind the scenes. Support of the end user, (especially the enthusiast audience) has been the Achilles heel of all major makers of high-end audio equipment and software. Taking some examples that I have had experience with:

1.Cubase 4 had some serious compatibility issues with Giga Studio 3; and vice-versa. By the time enough users apparently complained to Steinberg, Cubase 4.5.2 finally could live with Giga Studio 4 on the same home computer. I can only guess who’s the guilty party; however, that did not matter to me. I know Tascam is busy building high end electronics ($450 for a CD burner? Wow! She better be pretty slick!); I can only believe that the Giga stuff was an unexpected pay off for their developers who had all of the makings on the benches and drawing boards anyway. Their support attempts for me were pretty good but I have yet to see any results because I put the Giga mess on the shelf for two years. But larger companies, like Tascam, from Microsoft and Intel on down, simply do not give a you-know-what for the home or single user. If you are not purchasing 100 licenses or more, you are of no consequence and get treated that way.
2. The above comments bring out another issue, that again apply to all the big spenders; they simply have no way of staying in touch with their end users, big or small. You would think that finding out what your audience is doing would be important, but all these companies can do is pass out eight-packs of Coke at a few focus groups in swanky hotels somewhere on the major beltways. The end result is that these so called hot products will be dropped in flash, leaving end users high and dry. For me, investing $2900 in sound equipment, software, then, plus the cost ($2500) of the computer equipment, well, I feel like I’m drained. Only to be dropped in the snow like an unwanted puppy. I have major issues with the whole audio equipment and software industry being a saucy bunch of twits who use the big star celebrity names on their web sites or display foot high letters on the gear and then try to make the independent user fell like he or she is hooking their wagon to a star. Bunch of hooey! Just build a decent product that actually works all the time and I’ll be happy.
3. Which brings me to the last point. Big wigs in board rooms and corner offices housed behind mahogany doors in the audio, film and manufacturing world care not a dime for the artistic community of actors, musicians, writers, and electronic experts except to use that community as a tool of exploitation for the unique end of making the bottom line look good on the quarterly report.
Period.

By chimuelo on December 29th, 2010 at 5:20 am

I don’t write major movie soundtracks, or anything like that. Just get calls when someone hits some of sutdios here and needs certain parts performed, and then I do 6-10 gigs a week, but used Gigastudio/Scope DAWS.
Those days are long gone, and FWIW this happened when Gigastudio started listening to the cackling Hens on forums and started allowing VST FX to be integrated. It suddenly became like a Receptor as we seemed to be waiting for support to fix what they considered a popular VST effect, etc.
Then the fact Kontakt was rolling forward and had more developers and more material to choose from, that’s when I decided to go from GSIF to ASIO.
On another note, today is the 29th of December 2010, and I took time off to upgrade and reherse new material. Just got a call to play at this Strip club with some R & B jammers Friday Night for 2 sets of improv, for free booze, food and 200 USD. But guess which ancient computer I will use……..??

My ancient Gigastudio 2.56 that I never upgraded that is just EPianos, Upright, Horns and Miraslav Strings……..
The sound card is the ancient Scope Pro DSP that has an excellent B3 and killer synths, effects, etc.

So I shall love Gigastudio for always being there and starting this whole journey form all hardware to virtual instruments.

But the fault lies with management.
As I see it, it’s common for a corporation to dump it’s product line or any part of the company thats taking a bath…

I still get teary eyed thinking of Giga,…………but then my new x64 bit Scope/Kontakt DAW’s get powered up and I start worshipping them..

Happy New Year.

By Joe Hill on February 18th, 2011 at 1:47 pm

Great Article! Very well written, rare in the the pro audio world. Thanks!

By Alex Janes on March 12th, 2011 at 5:05 am

Man what a great article. Thank you for your crystal clear rendering of what is truly a tragic form of product (and thus user-base) negligence.

Dare I say this is what happens when ‘bean counters’ are given control of a technical niche market?

I only hope some people somewhere learned something from this — I know I sure as hell did.

By Greg Reiter on October 29th, 2011 at 9:09 pm

Excellent article, Peter!

By %spi nfile-generic_anchor_text.dat% on December 25th, 2012 at 3:13 am

Hmm it seems like your website ate my first comment (it was extremely long) so I
guess I’ll just sum it up what I had written and say, I’m thoroughly enjoying your blog.
I too am an aspiring blog writer but I’m still new to the whole thing. Do you have any tips and hints for inexperienced blog writers? I’d certainly appreciate it.

By hi five on January 12th, 2013 at 7:24 am

Nice post. I learn something new and challenging
on sites I stumbleupon every day. It will always be interesting to read articles from other
authors and practice a little something from other sites.

By http://tinyurl.com/carodeasy33781 on January 23rd, 2013 at 6:02 pm

I blog as well and I’m posting a thing very similar to this excellent blog, “Are Composers To Blame For GigaStudio

By nummerupplysningen.se on February 6th, 2013 at 10:08 am

What’s up, I desire to subscribe for this web site to get most up-to-date updates, thus where can i do it please assist.

By read this on February 25th, 2013 at 2:30 am

I say we need much more information like this on the web.
I should never have to browse through 7 pages of horrid google search results simply to discover 1 site that is genuinely relevant and
helps me. It’s a travesty I say.

By find out more on April 6th, 2013 at 1:02 am

I for one believe this was a outstanding article.

There may have been a handful of more information,
sure, but what was said was said skillfully
and I couldn’t agree more if I tried. Any more posts on this matter forthcoming? I really hope so. I will bookmark just in case.

By Victorina on April 7th, 2013 at 4:05 am

Been looking for no less than 30 minutes for practical content for the paper I’m writing and I’ve come up
with nothing at all… until now. Thanks very much for this post.
It was a tad difficult to find, especially because it’s helpful. Is google becoming awful with their search engine results or what?

Trackbacks

Leave a Comment