Sampleset prices: a proposal

[Franz64]

Hello all,

I'm starting this new topic hoping to get a better understanding
(and possibly improving) of the marketing possibilities for Hauptwerk
samplesets.

From a multitude of forum posts a regret emerges, that most virtual organ
sample sets are offered at exceedingly high prices. Of course, what is
"exceedingly high" for one customer will not be for others, otherwise no
sampleset would be sold, which fortunately for our producers is not the
case. Moreover, "exceedingly high" is not referred to the quality of the
samplesets themselves, often very high, but simply to the available
budget of customers (and their families...). Like all other forum
members, I am also fully aware that producing a sampleset is a very costly and
time-consuming task, and I am not saying that its producer does not deserve
the income that he expects when deciding its price.

All this said, I still imagine that there is room for improvement. No
one should lose: Producers should obtain the same or greater income per
sampleset, and more HW users could buy more samplesets.
I reason as follows (please correct me if I am wrong):

Practically all the cost of producing a sampleset lies in recording and
processing, and is independent of the total number of copies sold in the end.
The income (let's call it I) for a producer of a sampleset, instead,
does depend on the number of copies sold (N), and the price per copy
(P), as I = N x P. The income remains constant if the sampleset is sold
at a price P/2, but in 2*N copies (and twice as many people will enjoy it!).
Now, let us consider the price of a particular sampleset P as the
independent variable, while N (the number of users who will buy that
sampleset at a price <=P) will change as a function of P: N = N(P).
Thus, by selling the set at a price P the producer will obtain a total income
I(P) = N(P) x P. This function has at least one maximum for a finite
value of P: it is zero for P=0, it is definitely zero also
for very large P (the customer buys the real thing otherwise...), but
is not zero at intermediate values of P (samplesets are indeed sold).

The maximum value of I(P) represents the largest income a producer can
obtain (over a given time period) from selling a set, and knowing at
which price P_max does it occur should be appealing for him!
What I'm not at all sure is how well the different sampleset producers
estimate the price P_max which would give them the largest income.
Rather, I suspect that with the current sampleset prices P, only the
upper tail of the N(P) distribution (i.e. a minor fraction of potential
buyers) can afford a typical set, a non-ideal situation for both sellers
and buyers.

I am aware, of course, of the various promotions that each
producer makes (holiday sales, introductory discounts, stepwise price
decrements, try-before-buy...), but these discounts (of order of 15%)
seem not enough to boost the number of samplesets sells.
Has anybody seriously estimated if a much more substantial cut to prices
(e.g. one-third to one-fifth of current ones) will enlarge the number
of buyers by an even greater factor, with better satisfaction for all
parties?

I imagine that, as of now, a producer decides to set the price of a new
set by guessing the minimum number of probable sells, and dividing
the total income he expects/feels appropriate by this number.
If this number is underestimated (and more users end up buying the set),
the producer may have a larger-than-anticipated return; but chances are
that this number be overestimated... This is probably a too-conservative
approach, rather than an expansive one, of reaching as large as possible
number of buyers, and also getting larger incomes.
Remember, HW forum members are today 1000+...

Of course, doing so "blindly" would involve a certain amount of risk for a
producer, which he might not be willing to incur into, of selling still
few copies at a little price, and not even recovering the expenses. So,
for my proposed way to be viable for producers, some reliable estimates
of the selling potential of a given sampleset should be available prior
to setting prices and actually selling it.

I think that this forum is the ideal place to collect (perhaps
anonymously) expressions of interest towards sampleset, in a more
quantitative way than the usual "wow, I look forward towards this set's
release!" (maybe followed by giving up once the price is found to be too
high...). I just noticed that polls are apparently not allowed here (or
I was unable to find out how to start one). However, I think that a poll among
HW forum users (or some equivalent means) might be a good starting point:
given a sampleset (after all demos are there, etc.) all interested
users should vote for the maximum price P they are DEFINITELY willing to
pay for it. Of course, these must be expression of REAL interest in
buying that set within a short-term period (e.g. one year), not generic
intentions. Also, unrealistically low offers must be avoided, as HW users are not millions...
If these conditions are not met, producers could not rely on these data
and the system fails (i.e. prices remain high as ever).
Maybe non-anonymous votes might be more appropriate to commit people...
By whatever means, a producer should be able in the end to known the
distribution N(P) without guesses, thus having a solid estimate of his maximum
income, and of a price affordable by the largest number of users. I
suspect that if this exercise is made, very many HW users will be actually
buying a lot of sets at strongly reduced prices, such as 100-200 Eur/set
while it is now 300-700 Eur/set.

Will the sampleset producers (and forum administrators) accept to
make this statistical experiment? I am not trying to violate secrets
(I remember you are not willing to unveil sales numbers...), but only
to improve the satisfaction level of most people here, and at the same
time keeping producers' incomes constant or increasing. Would you be
happy if you produce a "perfect" set, but almost nobody will buy and
enjoy it since it is too expensive?
Do other HW users agree with this idea? Is it totally bad (I known more
statistics than economy...)? Are there better ones?
Sorry for the long post, anyway!

Regards,

Francesco

[polikimre]

Jiri Zurek did exactly this a couple of times. There was a brief period when people could sign up for the sampleset and commit to buy it. The more people signed up, the less they had to pay at the end. The St. Maximin set ended up at 380 euros instead of the original 520 with 37 early buyers. Also it was used for the Zwolle set (520 instead of 640, with 48 buyers).

Check this thread.

Also, the pricing scheme for the Zwolle set.

The fact that Jiri repeated this experiment tells me that it was successful.

[Franz64]

Well, not exactly this: Jiri fixed a starting price, and the first users to order the set had in fact committed to pay that full price. Eventually, there were, as you say, 48 buyers for Zwolle at the 20% discounted price of 520 euros. That's a partial success, I think...imagine how bigger the number of buyers would have been (100? 150? who knows?), if one would have simply been allowed to say e.g. "I will pay for this 250 euros", and this from the very start of the offer!
More than the actual income Jiri made, I suspect.
I may be wrong, of course, but only an experiment will tell for sure!

[micdev]

Francesco,

I think that on the sample producers's side there are many things to consider; the same is true on the user's side.

For the producers, they hope to cover their production's cost and make some money... all of this within a very small market (how many Hauptwerk licences were sold? 750, 1000, 1500 top?)

Now let's consider the cost of HW+1 sample (METZ)+ the hardware (computer, keyboards, pedalboard, speakers) to run that sample you will get nice system for something around $8000-$10000. This system will run the Metz within 8 gigs, 3 brand new keyboards, new pedal board... well, everything new! And as a bonus you get a nice little English Organ, so 2 organs...

Compare this to a brand new Rodgers/Allen etc, there is no comparaison, especially if you consider that for only a few hundred dollars you can get a completely different organ... something not really possible with the digital one (unless you connect a computer with HW to it!)

Add another $800 and you can get the Zwolle, $500 will get you Bovenwerk volume one or many other organs (Romantic, baroque, Neo Romantic etc.)

The problem with samples set is that they are addictive. Thing about it, in the past, when you bought a Rodgers/Allen etc, well, you were stuck with the sound within the instrument, and you were happy with it.

But HW changed all of that; why play only one organ when you can get many different one. I'm sure that some of us are happy with only one sample (after all, they played all their life on the same organ), but for others, they need many samples, all the latest.

I don't think that the price of samples are too high... but the price of a sample is too high if you don't like it and don't use it and I think that this is where we (the users + producers + Milan/Crumhorn) must work together to find ways so producers get their money for their work and the users are sure about what they are buying before spending hundred of dollars.

When you think about it, when you buy a brand new stereo, a new HD flat panel etc etc, you always want to view/hear it "live"; even if you read how great it is in some reviews, you usually want to try it; most stores will even allow you to return the merchandise if you're not satisfy.

This is how business is done now, and we are expecting the same thing from most of the stuff we buy.

Brett proposed a "cut-down" version of Bovenwerk; for me it is not a real solution; I can play some chords, change stops, but I can't get the "feel of the instrument" by playing a whole piece; for some, this might be a good solution though.

Jiri Zurek tried differents things like "mini version", "cut-down version", try before you buy, group discount before a date so your investment risk is lower. Only the "try before you buy" is a 100% solution for the users... but I'm not sure that Jiri got a lot of orders for his Forcalquier sample compare to the number he sent. (Freiberg won't be offer as a "try before you buy")

Dr Maier will try the "buy it and if you don't like, you get a refund minus 25 Euros"... could be a solution. Time will tell.

I did wrote a thread about "temporary licence for sample" ( http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopi ... highlight=) , something that is available for many softwares (full version without limitation for XX days, then cut-down version or the software is disabled). Unfortunatly, the dongle used by HW has limitations that make that solution difficult to implement.

For me, as I said, the price of sample are only too high is you don't like it or use it. I, for one, want to spend my money on something I will like and use.... especially these days!

Too bad that no one is using one of the oldest marketing trick.... pay the product in many monthly payments. For example, buy Bovenkerk for 5 easy payments of $110.00... all of the sudden it seems more affortable! I checked for fun with Paypal and there doesn't seems to be a way to ask paypal to charge a credit card for a giving amount for X months.

[positive]

Some random thoughts:

N is a finite number, you can't judge the potential N by numbers of readers on this forum, many have just platonic relation with HW. Further, N would be influenced by a personal situation, if one has a Baroque type 2 manuals organ, does he need another one ?
As to the polling, some recent threads sadly convinced me that people would even vote "yes" and then acted "no" later just to damage a sample producer they perceive is in the "opposite camp" or they dislike for whatever personal reason.

Re: the payment schedule, who would bear the risk of a failed agreement in this age of failed loans ?

[adri]

(The following was composed before the weekend, but as I had to be away this weekend, it was not posted yet; but Francesco's first posting here expresses much of the same sentiments as I did; so I offer it here, unedited, and without commenting on what has already been commented so far:)


An Open Letter to the HW Community,

I simply love Hauptwerk. It’s a pipe-dream come true: to be able to play different historical organs in the comfort of my home has been something I have dreamed about for a long time.

Many of the organs we already have, and the organs that are promised, and the surprises that are surely to come, make us all salivate.

Yet, this wetting of appetites has certain consequences for all of us. When we think about the future of Hauptwerk, it looks both bright and promising, as well as potentially ridden with possible serious issues.

As I see it, and I hope I am totally wrong here, but I think I am not, the problem can be simply defined as the classic economic issue between supply and demand. Supply is surely going up, but is demand?

Let me outline what I see as potential trouble stops [read that last word backwards :-)]

1. Most of us started HW with a cheap HW1 sample set. The software was cheap, so were the organs; they sounded a lot better than anything else produced electronically/digitally, and HW was on its way. Great excitement was in the air. We all saw its potential, and our pipe dreams were big.

2. Then came HW2 and multiple releases, and the excitement grew larger, as did the costs. We upgraded software, we bought new sample sets. And we started watching our wallets and we started to weigh between which set to buy, and asking others for advice “which is better”, and demanded good and better demos, even try-outs of the organs. The personal consumer risk factor after all had grown: “I am ready to spend this much on this non-returnable sample set? What if I actually don’t like it, even though the demos sounded fine?” I am happy to see that sample set makers are coming up with new and creative ways to make us test organs before we purchase them. But there is room for improvement here. Refundable prepayment in full is not for everyone. Having only a few octave to play is not an attractive way either. Large downloads via the internet is far is a large hit and miss (we need an FTP system).

3. And we upgraded some more, and we needed more RAM, and better OS systems, faster computers, better keyboards, swell pedals, buttons to control stops, touch screens, etc. Some of these extra costs may have been unintended, unforeseen, but nevertheless unavoidable, consequences. Soon we found out that this newfound hobby and passion was going to cost us far more than we had dreamed of, and our pipedreams got a bit of a dent.

4. Are there currently enough Hauptwerk users to make it economically viable for the sample set producers to continue to offer us all kinds of wonderful samples sets? Of course, no one wants them to stop doing so. That’s not the issue. But the issue is: are they spreading themselves very or too thin here? I don’t know the answer, because I am not a sample set producer, and I don’t know the economic viability of the product, but my gut tells me that they are probably worried, also with their eyes on the current world economic malaise.

5. Since many of the new sample sets are of increasingly larger organs, which cost a lot more money than when we first bought into Hauptwerk, we as HW customers are wondering what is next, and how high prices will go. In these difficult economic times, how many of these most desirable sets that exist now and are coming soon can we truly afford? Many responders on the Forum have already expressed a disconnect between desire and affordability. Sample set producers probably start to wonder when a certain plateau is reached, how to go beyond it, if that’s possible or desirable, and how HW community can grow by leaps and bounds, which is something sorely needed.

6. The Hauptwerk community. The “demand” part of the economic equation is growing at a slower pace than the “supply” part of the equation.

Here are some ideas of what I believe would help the number of HW users to grow:

1. Each sample set producer offers any desirable HW2/3 sample set a potential new HW user wishes to purchase at an attractive discount, as a way to entice him/her to step into the HW world and not be disappointed. This offer is only for newbies. HW1 sets are excluded, as they can be played by different software.

2. Sample set makers offer subscriptions, which works as follows: you pay full price for the first set of a subscription series, and all subsequent purchases of sample sets in that series receive an attractive discount. The more you buy, the higher this discount could grow.

3. Or something like buy 4, get 1 free. An accumulative bonus card system.

4. The sample set makers form some kind of Association for the promotion of HW; a common non-partisan effort to help grow the pool of HW users, via advertisements in organ (and other keyboard) journals worldwide, via the web, via emails to organists, etc., etc. In other words: a joint marketing effort, to which each sample set producer contributes a set annual fee. The Association is run independently by an outside agency or single person. The efforts are audited on a quarterly basis by the sample set producers via a progress report and evidence of marketing efforts. The marketing effort is reviewed on an annual basis and will need to be renewed on an annual basis.

5. With the mediation of this agency, HW users are urged to promote HW, e.g. at fairs, organist conventions and meetings, personal contacts, etc. New HW customers provide info on whom introduced them to HW, and for every new HW user, the promoter receives a-to-be-determined award/discount on a sample sets of his/her choice.

What you do think? Good idea? Bad idea? Riddled with potential pitfalls? Just let me know.

I just offer this for your perusal, as I am passionate about this product, and like to see it truly succeed. I don’t know what kind of possible competition we may face from digital organ makers, who I am sure, are not sitting still (although we may hope that they think that we are an insignificant effort that poses no threat to them).

But the biggest issue we face is that eventually there is going to be a too large of a gap between supply and demand. And that’s not good news for the future of HW.

-Adri

[polikimre]

Adri,

your thoughts are very timely, I was thinking along similar lines, especially after Prof Maier announced the upcoming series of Historical organs. Is the market ready for that? Will people really buy all of those samples? How many of the samples would a serious HW user buy? Don't they create too much competition within a single sampleset producer?

And then, about the same time MDA announced the cut down demo version of the Kampen set, which to me indicates that probably there weren't enough people buying the set (I may be wrong). And soon after that, OAM announces the 100% money back guarantee, obviously to boost sales. Also, SP has try-before-you-buy for some of its sets.

I really don't know the answers, as I have no clue how large the HW userbase is. How fast is it growing? Does it follow the increase in the number of samplesets? How many copies of HW advanced have been sold? Adri's marketing ideas are key, I think, in expanding the user base. It is the sampleset producers common interest to get more HW users, because the current market seems quite saturated. Not many users will buy 3 Silbermann organs.

One target group would be organists with MIDI ready digital organs at home. Of course, to make marketing easier, HW needs to be a bit more user friendly for the not-so-expert user. MIDI learn would be a must, along with handling those special SysEX messages used for the stop control of some digital organs. Then, for 2000 dollars they can have pretty much whatever organ they wish, along with a computer, a MIDI interface and a descent soundcard. A fraction of the cost of their organ.

You can also target users with no console, but there the return is delayed. They have to get some manuals first, then a pedalboard, bench, all this needs to be installed in their home, only then they buy HW, play with it, look around for another set, and then they make a purchase. It could take several months or years. (For example, I'm yet to buy my first set, and it probably won't happen this year.) I don't think there are many organists out there who don't have a console, but are ready to pay 6-10k right away for a complete setup.

As for the price of samplesets: Once you have the hardware (console, pedalboard, speakers, etc.) all set up, they are actually fairly cheap. As I said in another thread, ask your friends how much they spend on their hobbies (gardening, golf, computer games, cars, model airplanes, stamps, books, CDs, etc.) a year. Then think about what you can get for that money in HW terms. Fortunately, HW allows for a gradual approach, you can work on your project for years.

The bottom line: more users needed.

[jwillans]

I have said this before, but I will say it again. My position is that I don't have confidence from demos alone that a sample set is for me. There are just too many variables. For this reason I have bought only one high priced sample set and a low priced one (on a whim). User feedback/opinions do count, as do introductory prices, but usually as the former start filtering through, the latter lapses and cancel each other out. In my opinion, and I believe many other, HW needs trial licensing of sample sets. This way I and other users will be able to fall in love with sample sets to a point where we have no alternative but to buy them.

James

[James]

I agree completely with the trial before buying idea. I would gladly pay for an opportunity to try a sample set before spending $500 plus for a new organ. I have bought more than my share of organs I never use, because once I tried them, I did not like one thing or another. As a result, I have not bought any of the larger organs in some time. With the many thousands I now have in my system, I have reached my limit, at least for now. I personally would spend up to about $50.00 for a trial period.
James

[adri]

Try before you buy has become quite common in the software business; as I am also a digital photographer, I can try PhotoShop and many other softwares for 30 days totally free of charge, before I have to buy it.

I wish we could implement this kind of time limit on a set, but Martin Dyde says this is currently not possible. So, I welcome any creative approaches.
Dr. Maier's idea of offering a refundable set for 2 weeks is nice, but personally, I think 2 weeks is too short. But I welcome the try it out before you buy it approach.

I am glad that the HW community is beginning to think more and more alike on these issues of supply and demand, as I am sure the sample set makers are as well. But to make this product more viable, we MUST increase the number of HW users. Without that, we will get stuck.

[deWaverley]

.
I quite agree about the demos - without them I think the market will stagnate, for the reasons people have given.

Not many users will buy 3 Silbermann organs.

Well many of us would, if they were £100/150 a time. There are one or two people here with seemingly limitless amounts of spare cash, but in the main you are selling to musicians - who are not generally known for their wealth...especially church musicians.

The bottom line: more users needed

Well I know quite a few FRCO organists, and not one of them has even heard of Hauptwerk! This is a product that seems to actively seek obscurity! If you think of the horror Martin felt that someone could actually visit him to try it out! - and now there is not even a place you can buy HW in the UK!...let alone go along for a test run.

Publicity sent out to all organ teachers / music colleges / Cathedral organists etc....Adverts in organ magazines / Music Teacher magazine....Demonstration days....Sale through music shops like all other music software?

I'm no expert, but it might be worth at least trying these proven routes to market before hand-wringing and complaining that it's a niche product.

It's a great product, but the company and the sample-providers need to club together and get out there doing what all businesses have to do - self promotion.

deW

[dadams]

Expanding HW into a larger audience could very well kill it. The average organists I know can't cope with MIDI much less the variables in getting a full HW system up, running, and stable. The increased cost of supporting a complex niche product (ie, telephone support) is not linear, its quite geometric as you add more and more lower skilled users to the user base requiring more support call time.

The last thing (IMHO) we need is to roll this software out to a notably picky musical community, which then turns on the product due to lack of their understanding or software/hardware support.

I would think a turnkey solution would be great, console, software, hardware and all. However, there is no such thing in Windoze as a self-supporting system, good old Microsoft seems bent on never letting that happen. The cost of support on software that requires good support (database, applications, etc) should work out to about 20% per year of the initial cost of SW. Frequently vendors provide minimal call-in for that price and any actual "support" is quite a bit extra on top. Not sure the average church musician could handle much of that. Also, software support positions are notoriously hard to fill. In the US, the problem is that once people take a support job (as relatively unskilled) and stay a year, they are worth a lot more on the job market with that one year of experience, so they leave. Very hard to keep support people in employ.

Having said that, agree that 'try before buy' is a standard across the software industry, and would be a good idea here too. Why not have a trial copy with Martin's little old triangle binging every few seconds, then distribute a new copy once purchased. Hopefully Martin hasn't thrown away the triangle since the corporate marriage, :-)

[Franz64]

I'm glad of so many posts to this discussion thus far!

Maybe I have overestimated the number of actual HW users, from the
number of forum members (including silent ones)...I am surprised to read
that polikimre, with his 70+ posts, has yet to buy his first sampleset!
But, isn't this a confirmation that most of us, despite our strong
interest, are really scared of investing so much money in them? As I
said in the first place, saying "this price is appropriate" is highly
subjective (and as such cannot be objected against), but an objective
fact is that interested people are discouraged when start to embark on a
Hauptwerk project, exciting as it may be...
So, I am strongly convinced too that we (users and producers alike) should
try to promote better Hauptwerk, for it to have a future. Worst of all,
sampleset producers might give up in a few years, due to the lack of
sufficient demand!

From forum posts, I have the impression that most HW users are not
professional musicians at all (for one, I'm not), but rather people
with a stronger (on average) background on information technology,
engineering, or other technical matters.
I agree that convincing an average musician (who typically already own a
MIDI-capable digital organ at home for practise) to use Hauptwerk is not free
of difficulties: they know traditionally very little about computers,
software, hardware, RAM, CPUs, all cryptic terms to them. Maybe younger
people feel more at home with all this (or everybody has a friend who
understands this, at least), so that students might be a privileged
target for expanding the HW market (and I expect that young people are
more curious to explore than older ones - of course only in an average
sense). Speaking of italian musicians, I should add that not many of
them (AFAIK) read english very well...and translations of all Crumhorn
Labs/MDA/OAM/SP/etc. pages would be very beneficial.

In my opinion, try-before-buy or similar options solve only one side of
the problem, i.e. if you are unsure if you like a set or not. What if
you are entirely convinced that you like it, but it is out of your
budget (especially in uncertain times like now)? I am convinced that the
OAM Sauer (for example) is a wonderful set, but since my primary interests
are in baroque music, I am deferring buying it until...who known when!
And, even if the wonderful new baroque instruments announced by OAM
**all** appeal me very much, I cannot say I will surely buy them,
if they are priced too high...so, an expansion of the user base seems
really needed, problematic as it may be.

Therefore, I have some additional suggestions. I fully agree that
turnkey systems are to be preferred, rather than letting potential
users wander through endless trial-and-error steps (for
not-technical-minded people I really mean "endless", in the sense that
they soon give up, then spread the word that "HW is worthless, doesn't
work as advertised!"). A good news is the availability of HW-ready
consoles, as advertised here some time ago. Another way we users might
help is maybe building a database of HW setups actually working (and the
corresponding capabilities to play specific samplesets),
describing one's hardware with a sufficient level of detail that a
computer illiterated person might go to the nearest computer store and
order a system which will work for sure (perhaps accompanied by a
minimal set of instruction from "our side"). I feel that the indications now
given in the Crumhorn Labs web site are too little, as they assume some
(or even considerable) expertise from the user.

Moreover, the world of MIDI is obscure to most people. Again, we
"pioneers" should collect experiences (rather than let them remain
scattered throughout a myriad of forum posts) in some sort of database,
accessible via the Crumhorn Labs web site. This especially for the
existing digital organ consoles, starting point of most organ students
or professional organists towards a HW journey. How many makers of
digital organs are there? I can think of a dozen at most. If I am given
an appropriately visible place, I am ready to post all MIDI messages
sent by my Ahlborn console, and many other users owning digital organs
might do the same. I
think that this might encourage many new users, who are confused by the
MIDI language technicalities, and give up shortly having tested
that...they are unable to make the trial HW to run with their
ready-to-use Viscount/Johannus/Ahlborn/Rodgers/whatever!
...and of course, since they have already spent a lot of money to but
their digitals (once in the life!), do not want (or can) to spend another
lot in new hardware/software.

As for the student/professional organist market, I would stay away from
too-simple formulas such as "you can play a pipe organ at home": they
play every day a **real** pipe organ, so they do not need one at home!
What they do **not** every day, however, is to be able to play
Bach/Franck/Widor/Liszt/Reger/Messiaen/Cabanilles/Buxtehude/etc. on
an organ that is appropriate to each of them! Many do not even realize
that their "versatile" 2-3 manual organ they play every day does a
pityful rendition of most of this music. Many may not care about this,
but with plenty of CDs showing how different the music sounds when
played on a most appropriate organ, some awareness of this has
undoubtedly spread (again, younger people might lead the wave).
The current (and forthcoming) offer of sampleset is undoubtedly very
appealing for all those with historically-oriented tastes. We might need
to just advertise better these wonderful possibilities, and make as easy
as possible the building/running of a HW setup for non-technical people.

For the same reasons, I reject a comparison between this sort of project,
of a great cultural importance for the study of the organ history
throughout all countries, at the same level as other hobbies. HW has
for me a higher "status" than just a hobby. No surprise that Prof.Maier
activity is somehow related to an "organ expert" university master, or
Jiri Zurek says that sound documentation is also part of some projects
at Prague university. Incidentally, I seem to understand that OAM access
to some historically significant organs was greatly facilitated by his
academic "sponsorship", so to speak. In promoting HW, one should emphasize
its educational/cultural value, as an investment to become more cultivated
musicians, and not just say "you spend so much for hobbies, why not to
spend the same for another hobby" to the (few) people who can do so.

Francesco

[polikimre]

I am surprised to read
that polikimre, with his 70+ posts, has yet to buy his first sampleset!
But, isn't this a confirmation that most of us, despite our strong
interest, are really scared of investing so much money in them?

No, this is just a confirmation that I haven't had the hardware (manuals + pedalboard) to play the organs I wanted. I've researched the organs, I have a shortlist, if I had had the money, the space and the console a year ago, i would have bought a number of organs. This is what I discussed in one of my latter paragraphs: If you don't own a console, then you either enter the market slowly, ie., it will take some time before you buy anything, or order a console right away and buy a few samplesets. I'm entering slowly. Once I finish my console, I'll play with St Anne's, then buy a larger organ (Vollenhove, Cappel, or a Silbermann), then after that I'll buy a bigger computer, and only after that will I buy another set.

Actually, if I were a bit more adventurous, I'd buy up the cheap organ consoles that come up on ebay, MIDIfy them, build in a computer and sound interface, and the sell them as standalone Hauptwerk organs. Anyone interested?

[micdev]

In my opinion, try-before-buy or similar options solve only one side of the problem, i.e. if you are unsure if you like a set or not. What if you are entirely convinced that you like it, but it is out of your
budget

.... sad reality of life... I would love to own a 100 ranks pipe organ in my home, in my personal music room made of stone the size of a cathedral... but it is out of my budget ;-)

Of course I'm exagerating, but I think that samples producers have their own criteria to estimate the selling price of a sample. The day they will sell 0 copy of a new sample, they will have to rethink their pricing scheme.

Have a look at this guy http://www.midibox.org/forum/index.php/ ... 211.0.html I'm sure that he own only one sample; this organ was built specifically for a sample and he's having fun playing it.

I think that we are lucky to have such a selection of samples; but I wonder, how many samples does someone need... depends on what you are playing I guess.

Once you have one baroque, one romantic, one comtemporary sample, (far from being a professionnal organist I'm sure I'm forgetting important periods) you can basically play most of the organ litterature.

Of course buying a good Silbermann at $250 will allow you to buy more samples (more Silbermann if you like), but eventually, you will always use the same organ for a given period. How many Silbermann and Cavaillé-Coll does one need? I guess, one good one!

Far from knowing all the great organs of the world, the great organ builders, I'm sure that the HW library is lacking instruments from certains periods while offering too many similar organs.

The question of $$$, though important, isn't the problem; the problem is having no sure way to choose one organ among all the other of the same type, no real "live" way to compare a new sample with one we already own.

Now imagine, dream a bit; you go to http://www.crumhorn-labs.com/downloads/trialware. On that page you see all the samples available and CAN download it for a free 30 days trial, no cut-down version, no triangle sound, the full version for 30 days!. (The download of a few gigs of data is not a problem anymore for anyone with a hi-speed internet connection). Wow, what a dream.... for us, the users. For the samples producers, I'm not sure it will be a good thing for them, because you will eventually buy only a few samples, the one you really need and like and overall the total number of copies sold will be lower....

P.s. Did you click the trialware link? I told you, it was only a dream :-)