Capturing a modeler? (modelerception)

[kartikg3]

Jon just spews out ridiculously cool riffage

Riffage Spewage ®

 

[eggpl@nt]

It's actually a written policy in the group - and fortunately people outside have generally followed suit including tonehunt! It's just phrased in the form of not violating EULA for products rather than explicitly saying no sharing of modelers/software captures. Initially it was a struggle, but it seems to have gone over well in the long run

Love that.

On that note, this may be some violation of the Fractal EULA. Fractal has commented that capturing their IRs for use with other products violates the EULA, and I imagine that this falls into the same category. (I personally think this is silly, but it’s not my product or IP.)

Now, I don’t know what Fractal can do to enforce this (remote brick the unit lol). Selling FAS-based captures (not saying that’s your aim at all, Jon) would probably get more attention than just providing yourself with the convenience to use this sound in your DAW, but I dunno.

 

[GuitarJon]

Love that.

On that note, this may be some violation of the Fractal EULA. Fractal has commented that capturing their IRs for use with other products violates the EULA, and I imagine that this falls into the same category. (I personally think this is silly, but it’s not my product or IP.)

Now, I don’t know what Fractal can do to enforce this (remote brick the unit lol). Selling FAS-based captures (not saying that’s your aim at all, Jon) would probably get more attention than just providing yourself with the convenience to use this sound in your DAW, but I dunno.

I have no idea, I'm not sharing these sounds anyway. It was just for this test. I'm not even using the sounds :)

 

[eggpl@nt]

I have no idea, I'm not sharing these sounds anyway. It was just for this test. I'm not even using the sounds :)

Sure, I was mostly thinking out loud, not chastising or enforcing.

Given how many times I’ve seen Cliff say “if you like the sound of a previous firmware, revert back to it,” using capture technology like this on a modeler that gets as many updates as the Fractal stuff seems like an obvious conclusion. Then you can keep up-to-date without losing a sound you’ve come to love.

 

[ragingplatypi]

But will you know what to do once you capture it?

 

[northern_fox]

Love that.

On that note, this may be some violation of the Fractal EULA. Fractal has commented that capturing their IRs for use with other products violates the EULA, and I imagine that this falls into the same category. (I personally think this is silly, but it’s not my product or IP.)

Yeah - personally making captures for yourself or for content like this, I don't see any issue with if you're not sharing/selling them. There is definitely a lot of potential ethical grey area in general and people willing to exploit it though. Easiest for us to just have blanket policy and use it as an excuse to disallow sharing of anything in the software/modeler category (or anything else that feels a bit sus). Can't control what people do beyond, but can control what goes into certain spaces for sharing.

TBH I don't see the appeal anyway when you can use actual amp captures, but people gonna people.

 

[eon]

Why is it more "unethical" to create a capture of a modeler than an amp? Just don't get it.

 

[Byrdman]

Why is it more "unethical" to create a capture of a modeler than an amp? Just don't get it.

I was thinking it had more to do with taking captures of modelers and selling/advertising them as amp captures or taking captures of other's captures and selling them as you own. Mainly misrepresenting what you are selling.

We are fortunate to have really good modelers these days and as they get better and better, , I believe less and less people will be able to tell the difference.

 

[eggpl@nt]

Why is it more "unethical" to create a capture of a modeler than an amp? Just don't get it.

I think it has more to do with ownership and the presence or absence of a EULA. If I buy an amp, I own the amp. I can do whatever I want with it. And there's no EULA limiting the ways in which I can use it.

With software, typically you don't own the software, but rather a license to use it. And there's a EULA to tell you what you can and can't do. Maybe that EULA doesn't prohibit profiling/capturing the product; maybe it does. Ultimately, you're beholden to what's in the EULA (whether or not you get caught violating it is a whole separate issue).

A physical modeler, IMHO, definitely falls into that gap between the two examples. Fractal, for example, does have an EULA saying that things cannot be extracted from the unit.

Of course, I think @Byrdman makes another excellent point with respect to how a profile/capture is advertised vs the true source material.

 

[Achilles]

Fractal, for example, does have an EULA saying that things cannot be extracted from the unit.

You put things in italic. Care to elaborate? How would 'things' relate to 'sounds'?

Example: I make a ton of profiles of an FAS Buttery and then sell packets of them online as 'FASt Oleo Profiles'.

Am I in trouble?

 

[eggpl@nt]

You put things in italic. Care to elaborate? How does 'things' relate to 'sounds'?

Example: I make a ton of profiles of an FAS Buttery and then sell packets of them online as 'FASt Oleo Profiles'.

Am I in trouble?

"Things" was a lazy way to be a bit hand-wavy and vague (sorry). Here is the verbiage from the EULA. Interestingly enough, the "except for archival purposes" almost does read to me (a certified dummy) as an allowance to capture an amp or IR for personal uses, especially when the tones are subject to change (see the Fryette Deliverance in 24.04 and Cliff's classic "roll back to an older firmware" response).

Selling would definitely be a no-no, I think, based on the verbiage that prohibits renting and distribution.

The user will not, directly or indirectly, reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to discover the source code or underlying ideas or algorithms of the Software; modify, translate, or create derivative works based on the Software; or copy (except for archival purposes), rent, lease, distribute, assign, or otherwise transfer rights to the Software (except as expressly authorized by this Agreement); remove any proprietary notices, comments, terms and conditions and or labels on or in the Software.

 

[Lysander]

I think it has more to do with ownership and the presence or absence of a EULA. If I buy an amp, I own the amp. I can do whatever I want with it. And there's no EULA limiting the ways in which I can use it.

With software, typically you don't own the software, but rather a license to use it. And there's a EULA to tell you what you can and can't do. Maybe that EULA doesn't prohibit profiling/capturing the product; maybe it does. Ultimately, you're beholden to what's in the EULA (whether or not you get caught violating it is a whole separate issue).

You own the sounds created by the software though.

From what i've seen, Fractal EULAs amount to "no, you cannot extract stuff like IRs from our products", but that's a far cry from profiling/capturing.

 

[eggpl@nt]

You own the sounds created by the software though.

From what i've seen, Fractal EULAs amount to "no, you cannot extract stuff like IRs from our products", but that's a far cry from profiling/capturing.

Yeah, that may be all an EULA can realistically cover--Fractal's or someone else's. I'm intentionally using terms like "I think" and "maybe" because I am 100% not an authority on this.

 

[Mongillo19]

What if I sell factory presets that already come on the unit but up the reverb mix up to 21 percent instead of 20

 

[Achilles]

Selling would definitely be a no-no, I think.

Would love to see both sides argue this one in court - if it hasn't been already.
We've had folks selling profiles under ridiculous pseudonyms for over a decade now.

MUNCHALL JAYCEE-8ZEROX2

Can't see how selling FAST OLEO profiles would be any different.

 

[Byrdman]

I think it has more to do with ownership and the presence or absence of a EULA. If I buy an amp, I own the amp. I can do whatever I want with it. And there's no EULA limiting the ways in which I can use it.

With software, typically you don't own the software, but rather a license to use it. And there's a EULA to tell you what you can and can't do. Maybe that EULA doesn't prohibit profiling/capturing the product; maybe it does. Ultimately, you're beholden to what's in the EULA (whether or not you get caught violating it is a whole separate issue).

A physical modeler, IMHO, definitely falls into that gap between the two examples. Fractal, for example, does have an EULA saying that things cannot be extracted from the unit.

Of course, I think @Byrdman makes another excellent point with respect to how a profile/capture is advertised vs the true source material.

You put things in italic. Care to elaborate? How would 'things' relate to 'sounds'?

Example: I make a ton of profiles of an FAS Buttery and then sell packets of them online as 'FASt Oleo Profiles'.

Am I in trouble?

"Things" was a lazy way to be a bit hand-wavy and vague (sorry). Here is the verbiage from the EULA. Interestingly enough, the "except for archival purposes" almost does read to me (a certified dummy) as an allowance to capture an amp or IR for personal uses, especially when the tones are subject to change (see the Fryette Deliverance in 24.04 and Cliff's classic "roll back to an older firmware" response).

Selling would definitely be a no-no, I think, based on the verbiage that prohibits renting and distribution.

The user will not, directly or indirectly, reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble or otherwise attempt to discover the source code or underlying ideas or algorithms of the Software; modify, translate, or create derivative works based on the Software; or copy (except for archival purposes), rent, lease, distribute, assign, or otherwise transfer rights to the Software (except as expressly authorized by this Agreement); remove any proprietary notices, comments, terms and conditions and or labels on or in the Software.

You own the sounds created by the software though.

From what i've seen, Fractal EULAs amount to "no, you cannot extract stuff like IRs from our products", but that's a far cry from profiling/capturing.

Yeah, that may be all an EULA can realistically cover--Fractal's or someone else's. I'm intentionally using terms like "I think" and "maybe" because I am 100% not an authority on this.

Maybe someone like @MirrorProfiles, or someone else that actually sells profiles, can shed some light on this. IMO, all we are doing is speculating here.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Maybe someone like @MirrorProfiles, or someone else that actually sells profiles, can shed some light on this. IMO, all we are doing is speculating here.

I’m not really interested in the legal aspect of it - I just don’t see the appeal of offering something that is easily available to everyone already, and already offers all the features, convenience and simplicity you could want.

Digital stuff doesn’t replace real gear. They have different uses, and the experience isn’t the same. Making profiles or models of a plugin while it’s in demo mode seems icky to me. and I don’t see the point in making a model of a modeller when you can just ….. use the modeller?

 

[laxu]

I was thinking it had more to do with taking captures of modelers and selling/advertising them as amp captures or taking captures of other's captures and selling them as you own. Mainly misrepresenting what you are selling.

We are fortunate to have really good modelers these days and as they get better and better, , I believe less and less people will be able to tell the difference.

Exactly. I tried some UA amp sim captures when I had the Tonex trial because I didn't feel like buying those pedals to try them for myself. But those were clearly marked as what they are.

There's a whole pile of Kemper captures where their "Kemperness" is buried in the description, if even there. So the captures, even though free, misrepresent what they are.

I don't think I have seen e.g Kemper/Fractal captures sold as real amp captures, but the better the digital tech gets, the more likely it is to happen and harder to tell apart.

 

[Fremen]

I'm late to the party, sorry :) Here's my captures of a modeler :


And my captures of my MK V and Triple Crown (using Suhr IR as a loadbox, plus my own custom IRs) :


Sound wise, and feel wise, it's the same for me (I used the same IRs, I make my own). And I captured many great amps besides my own Mesa, Friedman and Synergy modules : my friends' Mesa Lonestar, Diezel Herbert, PRS MT15, Soldano SLO30, Victory V30 MKII, a modded Marshall JVM410... Of course, it works better if the preset is well-tuned