It will be a mystery to me in which cases a copy / clone / reissue is bad or not. Native Instruments Reaktor library features all of Braids models: no big deal. Macbeth studio synths clones the minimoog. no big deal. Intellijel clones the SH101: no big deal. Acidlab clones the TR808: no big deal. Behringer clones the minimoog and TR808: people going nuts.
8 Likes
it seems clear now the beef is that she feels her contribution has been overplayed
that’s her prerogative and one hopes she pushes to address that so we can get our credit cards out (or part with a keeper gathering dust)
looking fwd to more vids
1 Like
I guess my point about the video was actually valid.
12 Likes
NI doesnt say “NI and Mutable together with Reaktor”
They’re just there.
Emilee Said in Reddit that she got paid with PR. So there is an Agreement but she didnt had influence about the Details.
I think that’s just a way of saying there was no payment, like artists getting their music in an ad ‘for exposure’
2 Likes
Right. Beat me to it. I don’t she meant that literally but sarcastic.
Well i would be pissed too in her shoes. Glad i still have a Tides on Backorder. That Freak…Not Sure If i need it. I have a 3U Mutable Instruments only system …that sequencer is nice though…
2 Likes
Absoeffinglutely.
If you are keen to be in control of your work and the design you should not release it as open source. Imagine Akai implemented it in the Timbre Wolf mk2 - there are much worse desaster scenarios than this Arturia synth which is a decent instrument. It does not follow the amazing design of Mutable Instruments but has the Arturia look which I find quite ugly, but this is only a question of personal taste.
This whole story is very contradicting. I will stop thinking about it before my brain explodes.
3 Likes
Seems perhaps Arturia believed that this mention of collab was “paying in PR”?
Like they thought by giving props to MI on their website was something that MI would be stoked about, and hoping that the design cues on the product would be a nice touch/surprise to impress MI?
Obviously this did not appear to turn out to be the case, and it will be interesting to hear Arturias side.
As has been said though, if it was just some cynical marketing ploy then it definitely is not cool.
5 Likes
Dirty capitalism.
1 Like
Idk. The fact they brought her only after all was said and done and she wouldn’t be able to say anything…doesn’t sit well.
2 Likes
Back on topic: did you notice that MicroFreak features models from Plaits and not all models from plaits? There is a huge gap in the possibilities of Arturia´s synth and the original module.
2 Likes
But it is MI code inside , so saying it is also MI product is ok, like it or not. If MI has problem with that , they should have think about that before they decided to use open source licence . I see how they don’t like it now, but they chose open source them self. .
Of course. Obviously.
I hope all this gets cleared up amicably because frankly the synth looks amazing
4 Likes
I know the thread is TL DR so I’ll be brief:
Not about code. About using MI name they way they have. Easy fix.
1 Like
I can see why a lot of companies are not willing to open source, it seems to be pretty complicated and fraught with potential for abuse/misinterpretation etc.
Props to MI for open sourcing though, I wonder if this experience will impact the decision to ammend their policy or even drop open source altogether?
I know. I want this ok as badly as yall.