Preset charging creators

lqdsnddist said:
Im all for folks making money for time put into developing a quality product. I've certainly donated to folks like Simeon even when they weren't "paid" presets.

That said, I honesty find the whole preset business a bit weird... It's like we want to turn music into this instant gratification, press a button, type of thing.

Guys used to set up their pedalboard with carefully selected pedals, choose their own order of effects, dial in each of those pedals, and then set their amps, again gear of their own choosing, to sound good with those pedals, their guitar etc

That was part of being a guitarist, and one of the fun parts at that

No one used to ask for someone else to set up all their given pedals, how to set their amp etc.

You played, turned a knob, and played some more. Repeat as needed

Now it seems we are losing that experience, that individually to our music.

Now it's pay $20, get a tone that someone else thinks sounds good, and that everyone else buying that preset will have as well.

Guys can go buy an Axe, buy some presets, and have some decent tones, but have zero idea how anything works.

That just seems like a shame to me
Click to expand...
Very good point. Part of the fun is the quest to find your own unique sound (even if it is not that unique).
 
Folks that aren't willing to take the chance of paying for presets that doesn't work for them, will simply choose not to buy them in the first place. I have no problem with folks trying to make a few bucks with their Axe knowledge. Nobody is being forced to buy anything here. Making presets takes time and effort. Some folks want a shortcut and are willing to pay for it. More power to them. Supply and demand at work.
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
Details are what create value. Now you're discussing a different topic - what's the threshold for a "good" preset.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly, what's a "good" anything?

IMHO, the perception of sound is waaaay too subjective to be able to make a definitive "yes, this is it" call over.

Or even a "this is good and this is not".

Of course, we all do...
 
A number of years ago, as a social experiment I created a free network chat program - Install it onto your PC, and chat transparently with anyone on the network regardless of firewalls etc. It was an elegant and simple little app that worked well.

After a few months the were THOUSANDS of users.

Along with that, I received varions support requests, requests for updates/features, and some demands for features, (always given the big fuckoffski). Along with that, the inevitable 'I'll donate if you add this & this etc,

In total I got 3 donations which totalled around 65 bucks.

Theroy proven :) - Donation model does not work (in that domain anyway).

Thanks
Pauly

Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
It's much appreciated, thank you for your generosity. But I think any creator will share that "a majority" does not donate for sure. It has nothing to do with the people themselves or how generous anyone is or isn't. It's simply the model - donation products just don't bring in as much support as those with a definite price. If you can get it for free, majority will do exactly that.

Basing this on fact, not opinion. The creators know factually if majority are donating. With my discussions with several creators, majority do not donate. Heck I've even had customers say "if that were for sale [rather than donation] i'd buy it for sure." It's strange, yet it makes sense.
Click to expand...
 
maxdown said:
My opinion is that asking for a donation is a better model to work from ..... the majority of people generally will donate if the product is worthy"
Click to expand...

Wish that were true but they won't. Why buy the cow when the milk is free? App Store is a classic example, people piss and moan all day about ads in free Apps but won't pay $.99 to remove them.
 
Yeah. The fact that it isn't a set price and that it could be gotten for free devalues it greatly. Donation model is better in some situations, but it still receives a low amount of return.
 
I think the donations "also" fail for the one of the reasons most of us do not buy presets. They usually do not translate for use by many. Hence , the donation is NOT given because the person assumes the product is no good. Not a valid reason, but I bet it happens often enough. If instant gratification was received they would lean "more" to donating than not. Just sayin............
 
There was a band who released their album with no set price.
You could pay anything no minimum was required.

So you still need to checkout but you enter the price, the "seller" will be notified about how cheap or generous you are,
It's kind of a forced donation.

The band ended up making way more than they would have with a set price.
 
levipeto said:
There was a band who released their album with no set price.
You could pay anything no minimum was required.

So you still need to checkout but you enter the price, the "seller" will be notified about how cheap or generous you are,
It's kind of a forced donation.

The band ended up making way more than they would have with a set price.
Click to expand...
Kind of a completely different situation. No minimum, but could they pay zero?
 
I'm gonna be honest, I hope I do not get attacked for just being honest about this.
Some people want to charge for their Axe presets, others share for free using Axechange. I personally haven't spent a dime on any presets for my Axe Fx, nor have I purchased any IRs. (I tend to use very few presets or IRs anyways) Fact is I've gathered way more presets/IRs than I've had time to even test out.
Some presets just rock but if I like 'em I'm gonna tweek them to my prefs, some presets absolutely do nothing for me or have the dreaded no sound and I delete them all together.

There are supporters out there but not all of us are willing to grab our credit cards for sysex shares. At least the FAS community is active, I've bought a lot of MIDI gear where the online activity of shares free or paid is mainly dormant.
 
Very interesting read.. Just a thought but isn't the real looser the artist who spent years or decades developing his tone to be copied by a machine an sold for money? I bet if you ask them they would want royalty's. Forgive me if I am not understanding this thread, but am enjoying reading.
 
Chris@AxeFxTutorials said:
I'm sure that has nothing to do with the donation model's success :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yea, that's why I mentioned it. It's dishonest to say "there was a band" -- really it's "there was a big, huge, massively successful band with cult-like followers who will punch you in the eye if you malign Thom York's droopy...lyrics" :)
 
levipeto said:
Heh?
1, You didn't mention it, you told us the name of the band, that I didn't remember.
2, Why am I being dishonest for not remembering the name of the band?

Jeez!
Click to expand...
I think he was being sarcastic... That's how I read it.

Maybe I am wrong?
 
levipeto said:
There was a band who released their album with no set price.
You could pay anything no minimum was required.

So you still need to checkout but you enter the price, the "seller" will be notified about how cheap or generous you are,
It's kind of a forced donation.

The band ended up making way more than they would have with a set price.
Click to expand...
How does no minimum equate to a "forced donation"? And how could you possibly know if said band made more or less using this model? I've had music out on bandcamp which is basically the same model as this and it only really alerted the band when money was paid to us for what its worth, but even that is beyond the scope of the discussion here imo. Preset, music, hell anything digital is worth what someone will pay you for it, and as long as the credit (and monetary compensation should the creator of such be asking) ends up in the right hands thats the way it should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom