I joined the party because I like open source, too. And we can actually see the benefits right now – people rebuilding plugins, sharing old firmware versions and discussing how to bring back functionality. And I would not want it any other way.
FWIW I also tried MODEP on a RaspberryPi … no comparison to the real thing. Hence, as long as the usability experience on the original MOD devices is top-notch, these knock-offs are not a threat. But again, the user experience – especially for first time users – needs to be so good that people say “MODEP – ain’t nobody got time for that”. As per the forum, it is generally agreed, that there is room for improvement.
The thing is, we would not even be talking about this if MODDEVICES weren’t in trouble. And the trouble is not earning enough money. IMHO we should therefore focus on generating income streams. I personally very much dislike subscription schemes and would probably jump ship. But why not sell ready made images of the software for PC and RaspberryPi? Easy to use, 5€ per version. Duo/X/dwarf owners get updates for free. Let them compile the sources to save a few bucks… Ardour is doing it this way, I think. Or why not make more plugins available against $$$? You guys know the hardware best, publish/polish one free plugin and at the same time offer another one for sale. I doubt people would be angry if there were more paid plugins. I’d gladly buy stuff from you even if just for supporting the company but still getting something in return. Also, resellers should be offering plugin packs. Helps them, helps you.
this is not really doable since the device works offline.
you could subscribe for 1 day, take unit offline and enjoy the subscription perks forever.
the units do not have a clock or any way to know how much time has passed since it was last turned on.
counting the number of boots could work, but system is wide open and would be quite easy to work around it though.
these kind of DRM models and open access to the unit really do not get along.
we are able to get the commercial plugin licensing to work because of how every unit has unique hw part(s), so we can identify and check when a license matches the running system. (and a few more details, which for obvious reasons I am not going to specify )
a subscription based model could only work if there are other things at play, like an online account that the unit needs to ping every week or so or else you are charged a fee. or renting the hw and you have to return it after X days or something…
figuring out the business side of things is not my task anyhow, I typically just know how they are not feasible rather than the contrary.
** Opinions expressed here are my own for the sake of discussion and not those of the company **
I don’t think that’s really a problem as we’ve seen by the number of people saying their device is useless if they can’t connect it to the online service. I think that the desire to shop for new plugins, download and share pedalboards and install new updates would mean the risk of people just licensing a plugin and never putting that device online again is pretty low
I suppose most of the people will prefer just the easy way and be able to go online, login and be able to download nice plugins, update mod-ui for great features and share pedalboards, just for an small amount of money (in my opinion better once than subscription)…
At this moment I suppose it can be controlled if this is a mod device or a raspberry or other details….
I can’t see where MOD benefits from releasing software as OS?
Are people, not employed by MOD, contributing to development of the core software?
If the OS aspect of MOD is discouraging investors, maybe it’s time you go fully proprietary!
Hey Gian: just an encouragement.
I literally just bought a Mod dwarf from a retailer here in Aus. I didnt know any of this was going down. I feel for you guys, because the Mod devices truly are a standout in musical devices. i wish more people new about the potential of a dwarf. I sold some of my pedals to get a dwarf. it replaced my reverb, my looper, my tremolo and sounds great. what got me interested, was i wanted to create my own custom pedal: like the halo chorus from Diamond effects, that could speed ramp like a leslie. i contacted them, and it was going to out of their ability to make. they suggested something digital.
I just recreated the pedal. the skies are the limit to truly craft original sounds, but also control them how you want.
this is truly special. I have no programming software or computer hardware building knowledge, but i could do that.
People need to know how special this system is.
Good luck, God bless, Stay positive, knowing you made an amazing piece of gear.
Jarryd
I agree with this in many respects.
Also you should be aware that the Mod Devices operating system is optimally adapted for the duo/dwarf/duox, at least I think so, while a PC/RaspberryPi/… MODEP must run on all conceivable devices.
That is very difficult with GNU/Linux, legally as well as the reputation that mod devices then have in the community.
They would then have to take BSD?
My 2 cents, I also bought into the ModDwarf because of the Open Source nature. I’m a developer and loved the idea of a well designed, stable platform that I could play with without having to build the whole thing myself. I just wanted to muck about building a few plugins. I was very happy to pay for the hardware, doing all that design and actually getting it built is ‘non-trivial’ as they say. I really hope something can happen so that it will continue.
One of the most important reasons for me to buy the Mod Dwarf was the fact that Mod Devices uses open source software. I also knew Zynthian and iStomp before that. Anyone can find out very quickly who the creator of a software is when the people around Zynthian and iStomp even write that they use Mod software. As an OpenSource enthusiast and also a manufacturer (mostly we produce proprietary software, but as soon as it is possible also OpenSource) it was natural for me to buy a mod device, because OpenSource deserves support. But it’s like always: unfortunately, most people think more about themselves or don’t think about their actions. Very sad when an approach that should be respected is damaged by user behaviour. I can understand @Gianfranco very well…
When talking about subs, I just meant that people would need an online account to access the plugin/release depot matching their device’s hardware to get new updates or new plugins. MOD owners would have that access granted by default. I don’t think it’s got anything to do with DRM or any hardware clock or anything like this. Just username and password. And that would be controlled server side. Not by the device itself. A bit like a Steam account.
** Opinions expressed here are my own for the sake of discussion and not those of the company **
I see 4 main benefits
Brand recognition: As more hardware uses the OS, more users become aware of it which attracts more customers and developers
Revenue Source: users buying commercial plugins feeds revenue back to MOD
Conversion Potential: once users grow to like the system but feel limited by the hardware, they will want to purchase a MOD device (as we’ve seen)
Data: having a larger pool of users means there is more user data that can better inform the focus of development and marketing
This all requires user accounts and some kind of DRMs which I think is well worth it.
I would start with Pi then work with other 3rd parties if they want to adapt it to other devices so that they do the bulk of the work with support from MOD
I don’t think a subscription for the OS or a potential plugin version of the OS would make sense. That should be free in my opinion. Just like kontact from native or amplitube from ik multimedia or Android from google. The os/app and account should be free. The commercial plugins are paid. Perhaps that’s where a subscription could fit. As an alternative to buying individual plugins, you could pay a subscription to have access to them which ends when you end the subscription and there could be a time out so that it ends after a month or so if the device doesn’t go online again to verify the subscription
The various subscription models scare me. The scenario where I turn my device on at a gig, and find that it (or part of it) is not working because I haven’t had it online for n days is enough for me to quit using it.
That’s why I said it could be an alternative for individual purchases, not a replacement. So if it’s not your preference then you can purchase the licenses individually instead
I think this is the only Option for long term success and revenue stream. Get it onto as many devices (desktop, rpis and other diy platforms, fridges) and build a large userbase. This is hardest part: getting to a big enough number to get quality plugins you can sell in the store. I think the biggest competitor of this model is not line6, kemper but the iPad. It’s not that streamlined like the mod interface but I can have all the amps and synths. Connect my launchpad and route as I like.
I understand what @falkTX means and although I’m not sure if what you are suggesting would work right now @James, I think it depends only on us to make it work.
Meaning: if we keep pushing excellent features, plugins, nice new pedalboards, etc. and promote it properly with marketing - a bit as we did with the guitar synth, but I think we can go even better - I think everyone would want to connect often. I imagine someone reading the news in some blog that the MOD got a new awesome update. They look to the side and think “Man! I have a MOD sitting right here and I can get this super awesome new feature that would save me a few $$$ on other devices just if I keep paying this fee…I will totally do it!”…the fee should just not be expensive. I’m not suggesting having the updates paid, I’m only talking about these particular cases.
We should give nice incentives for people to connect the devices often and also promote new features better. I feel that at some point it will become more organic that people just connect.
Users with a MOD device should get more benefits for that.
But anyway, there’s still room for more paid plugins - as long as there are viable solutions on the free side, I think it’s ok to pay for the most premium plugin. I honestly feel that w have too few paid plugins, but I also understand why.
Ultimately for MOD devices users (and I know that this one is everything but populist), eventually even features. At least certain features. For example, I really would like to have Bluetooth MIDI support via dongle, I wouldn’t mind paying an extra fee (not on the range of the device) to get that.
The same for example the audio via USB (aka soundcard). Man…I set up my Duo with the experimental feature of Audio through USB and works great! And that saved me at least 150€ in a small soundcard that I would use for exactly the same thing.
I believe that the devices are already super versatile and make users save a lot of €€€ (or $$$ or whatever) on other pieces of gear - other pedals, MIDI interfaces, a MIDI to CV modules (in the case of the MOD Duo X). The dev team keeps getting smaller and more overwhelmed, the amount of feature requests skyrockets, and pretty much most of them make a lot of sense and are theoretically possible. I don’t think that this would be a bad one. By the end of the day, a user would decide which extra features he/she wants on the device or not. Probably a lot of users leave well without Bluetooth MIDI support or Audio through USB…
Sorry for getting a bit out of the “conflict between open source and business here”. Cycling back to it, I feel that the same approach could be applied to whatever images are available for non-MOD devices. On those, they could even pay for more plugins and more features - that are free for MOD users.
Even for Open Source features you could have a kind of crowd-fundings to make certain developments happen. Hire developers or allocate resources to work on such extensions.
People that really want a certain feature can then push for those developments using their wallet.
In the end everybody gets the benefits of this of course, but it doesn’t tie in certain common features to exclusive access rights.
)
