MAAT DR Meter - copy protection is terrible

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Effects Discussion
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

And the Longest Post on KVR Award goes to.......Compyfox! :hihi:

Post

This is what my Codemeter has been doing for the last couple of days (IP address and license info removed).

2018-01-02 22:25:27: CodeMeter for Windows
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Running on Microsoft Windows 10 Home 1709, 64-Bit
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Execution path: C:\Program Files (x86)\CodeMeter\Runtime\bin
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Application Uptime: 00:00:11 up
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Found IPv4 address:
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Found IPv6 address:
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Used Communication Mode (Client): IPv6 IPv4 SharedMemory
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Used Communication Mode (Server): IPv6 IPv4 SharedMemory
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Used IP address: default address
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Used IP port: 22350
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Used CmWAN port: 22351
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Multicast server search: not available
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Run as network server: no
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Run as CmWAN server: no
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Run as system service: yes
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Service startup delay: 1:35 minutes
2018-01-02 22:25:27: Box Access: use direct access mode
2018-01-02 22:25:42: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-02 22:25:42: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-02 22:25:45: License file loaded successfully
2018-01-02 22:25:45: Detecting CmContainer with Serial Number
2018-01-02 22:25:45: A new CmContainer is available (currently found 1)!
2018-01-02 22:25:45: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-02 22:25:45: Found new entries: 1
2018-01-02 22:26:56: Access from local(IPV6) to SubSystem (Handle 20)
2018-01-02 22:26:56: Handle 20 released
2018-01-03 08:46:51: Power State of the operating system has changed!
2018-01-03 08:46:56: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:46:56: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:46:56: License file loaded successfully
2018-01-03 08:46:56: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:46:56: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:47:03: Removable Device has been plugged IN/OUT!
2018-01-03 08:47:03: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:47:03: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:47:03: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:47:03: The list of available CmContainers has been updated!
2018-01-03 08:47:24: Access from local(IPV6) to SubSystem (Handle 32)
2018-01-03 08:47:24: Handle 32 released


That's without even using the DROffline app. Sometimes it asks for permission to launch on Windows startup too and I believe it slows down shutdown or makes it buggy (Windows says a program is still running, do I want to stop it etc... looks like it's Codemeter).

It's just a little on the annoyingly invasive side...

Post

Sent to MAAT support on 29 Dec. No response as yet, sale ended. This potential new customer now highly unlikely. Context for readers: Magix Sequoia has used Codemeter CMStick for years without issue (for me) through many upgrades of both application and computers.

Hi MAAT

I downloaded a trial of RSPhaseShifter in order to potentially take advantage of your sale. As a Sequoia & Samplitude user, I read the Readme Codemeter notes with first happiness and then some dismay. Attached is a screenshot of both my Codemeter dongles - with 1- and 2- serials. Is it correct that without a 3- dongle I will not be able to deposit a license on a dongle?

If so, I just need to let you know that you will miss out on the market of long time Sequoia users - which is probably also partly your target market! It would take a lot of motivation (in a saturated plugin market) to order a new 3- series Codemeter and work with Magix to transfer our licenses. The new Sequoia v14 supports v1 & 2 dongles - why cannot MAAT? I don't mean to make that sound trivial from a development point of view.
regards

Post

Russell Grand wrote:And the Longest Post on KVR Award goes to.......Compyfox! :hihi:
Er... no.




Okay, so let's sum a couple of things up:
Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: Redoing the Algorithmix tools means taking the source code and porting it into a new repository so I don´t understand the eLicenser thing. Copy protections comes after plugin programming and eLicenser doesn´t offer the various models like subscription, pay per use, etc..., why we use CodeMeter for that purpose.
Context is key here.
Algorithmix uses Elicenser. And I know of at least one company that uses eLicenser and offers a subscription model. That being AXIS Plugins.


Tischmeyer wrote:When you think any other free linear phase EQ is the same it is fine for you, we are OK with it too. Just go for it. I personally was looking for alternatives for the Algorithmix tools for years before closing the license agreement and starting with MAAT. And I have compared the PEQ orange and red with $10k hardware and all plugin-based LP EQs available I would consider as serious and it turned out that there are quite some big differences.
Markets offer always a broad range and when you go to buy a car you gonna find a lot of cars with 4 wheels and a steering wheel bringing you from A to B but there is a range from Fiat to Ferrari. Would you go to the Ferrari dealership and complain that it´s simply not fair to sell a Ferrari for the price of a small Fiat?
Sorry, but that argument is absolutely invalid to me.

I never said anything about freeware. I said "affordable tools".

I've used linear phase EQ's in the low budget range, to one of the most early linear phase freeform EQ's in software form with 64 nodes (bands) by Aixcoustic Creations (aka: Christian Budde - who always coded purely technical! His focus was "accuracy" in filters and measurement tools after all), to one of the most detailed and technical EQ creations I've ever used - and that being DMG Audio's "Equilibrium" (by Dave Gamble).

And here is the deal - this particular EQ - which I do consider a Royals Royce in this area, "merely" costs about 200EUR plus about 20% VAT on top - so roughly 240EUR. It uses a mere license file on top of that. And - DMG Audio barely does any sales which would undermine their creations.


If you think that 1k is adjusted for one EQ because "it's the closest to hardware" - then all the more power to you and your company. If you can afford it, even better. But I already know as much that you won't see that many sales on that behalf - at least not from the aspiring AE's that can't invest 300EUR/month for maintenance.

I mean, you worked for/with Steinberg... remember the Neve Portico series and what the software originally cost? I can get a similar filter behavior in Fabfilter Pro-Q, DMG Audio EQuick and even Tokyo Dawn Labs' EQ's - at a fraction of the price.

Or in your words - priced like a Fiat, but with the engine of a flipping Ferrari! So who would I rather support more as of this moment?

This is all I'm pointing out here.



Tischmeyer wrote:The re-issues will be certainly a bit more affordable but they are designed to be advanced specialized tools for pro engineers making a living off mastering. So, nope, we won´t sell it for $249! But we will make it available to those who honor the quality and research on a pay-per-use basis. If everything on the software market was sold for $249 and 80% off on Black Friday there is no room for R&D and you would always find the same code under the hood taken from some libraries. But this tools are far beyond public library and super post graduate based on years of research. You even won´t find a word about those technologies on Google and even high scale founders of very well known and established brands reach out eager to get to know the secrets (we won´t reveal). BTW, most LP EQs are based on the same technology and both Algorithmix based LL EQs (red & orange) we will release are completely different in architecture what makes them so unique, transparent and beloved by many pro audio engineers.
See my paragraphs above.

It's up to you if you want to do sales or not. But I'm still on the fence of "other tools are just as great - if not even better than up to par". Else countless records wouldn't have been mixed/mastered on these tools.



Tischmeyer wrote:Yes and no. Tools became more affordable which is fine but the Black Friday Craziness is not only good for the users. You find tons of brands and tools and especially for beginners it is hard to figure out which tools are actually really good. The consequence is that more plugin companies have less budget for real R&D and high scale staff. This is the reason why the very few really good guys (like Daniel Weiss) are more focused towards CE industry rather than wasting bad paid time in the pro audio industry. We are happy to have Dr. Christoph Musialik as CTO in our team who is pretty much one of the very few high level dudes. This will allow us to work on some stuff which was not yet available in the Pro Audio industry on that level. And consequently this will somehow reflect in the price tag of some tools.
I know "one man army" companies (some of these people, even personally) that work hard (incl. years of R&D and long betas) with "super affordable DSP solutions" to create outstanding tools that cut through the masses, while not costing an arm and a leg. But that's just a side note.

There is no need to show off here. To me only two thing are important:
1) does it deliver
2) is the expense adjusted for the studio implementation



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: I don´t get why you are so negative. The DRMeter is fully working tools which does it´s job for a very decent price tag. People loved the ballistics and we made sure that the new one works perfectly to offer a tool for all platforms and to go from there. I can´t see nothing wrong about that.
I'm not being negative - I'm being realistic.

The DR Meter is built upon a Dorrough patent based RMS realtime meter. And your defined "Crest Factor" (in a nutshell) is calculating the dB "range" between RMS avg max and dBTP, rather than the actual "crest factor" in electronics or THD measurements (basically - one among "many ways" to show a "crest factor").

It's not rocket science. At least not to me.



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: Actually all PMF supporters have received a cross grade offer and DRMeter users will be able to upgrade to the DRMeter MkII if they like.
Funny enough - I didn't. Maybe something got messed up with the database. I do remember issues back in the days, and I think I never bothered to sign up again, as the "paywalling" for edu-ware didn't really swing with me.

Then again - I got my crossgrade years ago already, via the competition's "unsanctioned release". I've since moved on to ITU-R BS.1770-x with doing "crest factor calculations" (*cough* DR-value) myself. Or using the PLR value with BS.1770-0 in ToneBoosters EBU Loudness. If I am lazy and really need that value. Which is mostly not the case anymore if I master at -14LUFS SLk avg and can have peaks up until -1dBTP - so I'm at a healthy +-12dB "dynamic range" regardless.



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: A non profit foundation requires donations to work. The old model didn´t work. Now we have a chance to use the money for a new page (which is more than over due) and having an own software company makes it more reliable for us deliver more and better technology solutions. Some things need some patience and long breath and I still see demands for education, information and other solutions to come to create more awareness for sound quality.
But why lock the software in question behind a paywall, that is supposed to educate and was freeware to begin with?! It didn't make sense back then.

I mean, let's look at the EBU R-128 "announcement" from 2012 for a moment again. What did Steinberg do? Create an R-128 freebie for educational purposes. Audication (Christian Budde) created a freebie for the same reason a year prior to that already. ToneBoosters unveiled EBU Loudness in the same year (2011) as "low budget tool" in direct competition to tc.electronic and Nugen Audio as well (who already started with those meters in 2010!). And these days, look at tools like Martin Zuther's K-Meter (although, old K-System meter) or Youlean Loudness Meter (ITU-R BS.1770-x specs). They all do two things right: a) affordable (or even free), b) they educate.

The sales route you do now at 35EUR incl VAT, with forwarding 5USD per sale to the campaign, is a different thing altogether. It makes sense "now" (since there is a clear path laid out now) - and is more affordable than the regular 99USD priced bx_meter (not counting sales).

However - it now feels kind of "too late" for this IMO. As mentioned before, you're chasing something that has been surpassed by another concept you were actually a part of (P/LOUD group). And those engineers that sat down, studied the EBU R-128/ITU-R BS.1770-x white papers, saw their potential for more than just "broadcast", then started to use it for regular mastering purposes while educating people... Heck - I'm one of those engineers!



Tischmeyer wrote:I have continued my activities to create sound awareness and educate people throughout the years, possibly not so visible to the public but with quite some impact and nobody is more happy than I, when we have the tools and budget to continue the PMF work on a bigger scale.
Personally, I am aware that you created tutorials for Steinberg (Wavelab), you're also part of the P/LOUD group (one of the creators of the EBU R-128 concept), etc. So I'm not too out of the loop. Others might have a different opinion on this.



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: Read the manual please. LUi is for loudness normalization and LRA simply does NOT work for MOR music.
Okay - to those that do not know what we're talking about:

LU = Loudness Units (based upon ITU-R BS.1770-x specs, or EBU R-128 - which I do consider a "preset" of the whole thing, though both heavily influenced each other)

LRA = Loudness Range, the "range" from lowest average signal strength to highest average signal strength in ITU-R type meters (gated)

MOR = according to Wikipedia, "Middle of the road (MOR) loosely describes any type of music that falls between popular music and serious classical music"


But to respond to this paragraph:
We're still talking apples and oranges, Friedemann. I am fully aware of the difference. But this doesn't mean that you can NOT create/use a PLR value in ITU-R meters (which would be gated if you use BS.1770-3 and up) for mastering MOR (pop music). Or even create a "DR value" - if you do the math yourself.

Once more - the "DR value" is just another indication how healthy your relation from "average signal strength to maximum signal strength" is.

As visualization (to those still reading along), an old 2009 video my Matt Mayfield Music:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: Maybe in 10 years but look out and hear and you will agree that it´ll take quite some time until meaningless peak truncation just for the sake of loudness has ended.
Yes - and we both know who to blame still. Magazines that write every month "make loud yet good sounding masters", xyz amount of Video Tutorials (including yours on mastering), Labels that still insist on "loud = better = more heard".

Though since 2012's introduction of Loudness Normalization, but especially since the releases of "Death Magnetic" (Metallica, 2008) and both "Memory Almost Full" and "Kisses on the Bottom" (Paul McCartney, 2007/2011), a lot has happened for the better. Music is less squashed to smithereens, and due to the Loudness Normalization on Playback, people realize "squashed mixes just sound bad compared to dynamic ones". Youtube and Spotify doing their part for this as well.

It will still take years to repair all the damages - I can agree on that. But we're already on a great track.

Which makes me even more concerned of the revival of DR-Meter as "best solution for music", which would actually go back to "bending the rules" (again, lack of saying "using a healthy loudness value is just as essential to having high DR values"). Even if it "makes sense and users appreciate it". It's still just approaching the issue form one angle.

I miss the big picture - the learning factor. The manual has a good start, but it's still only aimed at already skilled/knowledgeable engineers.



Tischmeyer wrote:Friedemann: I´ve always looking for cooperation being open for joining forces. It seems to be a disease of the music industry with too many egos. Do we have a union? etc. etc...

So, if you are interested in supporting the aims feel free to reach out.
I tried to reach out to the P/LOUD group years ago - but never got a response. I got in touch with a handful of individual members at this point (whom I share the occasional mail with, to tap each others "brains" so to speak - which does result in the one or another collaboration on top), and May 2017/AES#142 I finally met Florian Camerer as well.

I'm still doing educational work here on KVR (see my signature for KVR marks) regarding metering tools. So I will keep my eyes open on this topic and I will keep the offer in mind.



Tischmeyer wrote:Please excuse me, that I can´t further react on this thread just due to time limitations.
Understandable. Though I do hope the criticism was valid and you'll think about this for the future of MAAT.





MogwaiBoy wrote:This is what my Codemeter has been doing for the last couple of days (IP address and license info removed)

....

That's without even using the DROffline app. Sometimes it asks for permission to launch on Windows startup too and I believe it slows down shutdown or makes it buggy (Windows says a program is still running, do I want to stop it etc... looks like it's Codemeter).

It's just a little on the annoyingly invasive side...
That is a lot(!) of "phoning home" occurrences. Do you get error messages if you unplug your rig from the internet (WLAN or LAN)?
[ Mix Challenge ] | [ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ]

Post

Thanks to Compyfox for sharing details and knowledge! I went to the MAAT website and imo I read too much about "the one and only" & "the official" for tools that are available as freeware from others... However I'm a fan of eLicenser and iLok (own both) but I never heard of CodeMeter since I didn't came across any plugins that require it. Maybe there's a reason for it :lol:

Post

Tischmeyer wrote:The re-issues will be certainly a bit more affordable but they are designed to be advanced specialized tools for pro engineers making a living off mastering. So, nope, we won´t sell it for $249! But we will make it available to those who honor the quality and research on a pay-per-use basis. If everything on the software market was sold for $249 and 80% off on Black Friday there is no room for R&D and you would always find the same code under the hood taken from some libraries. But this tools are far beyond public library and super post graduate based on years of research. ...

Which ties nicely into this recent news announcement:
Image



I know that this is a PluginBoutique exclusive deal - but I honestly don't know what to think about this though. If the MSRP is 35USD (at MAAT, plus VAT - still about 35EUR), so what is actually the real at cost value of this plugin?
[ Mix Challenge ] | [ Studio Page / Twitter ] | [ KVRmarks (see: metering tools) ]

Post

Compyfox wrote:
Tischmeyer wrote:The re-issues will be certainly a bit more affordable but they are designed to be advanced specialized tools for pro engineers making a living off mastering. So, nope, we won´t sell it for $249! But we will make it available to those who honor the quality and research on a pay-per-use basis. If everything on the software market was sold for $249 and 80% off on Black Friday there is no room for R&D and you would always find the same code under the hood taken from some libraries. But this tools are far beyond public library and super post graduate based on years of research. ...

Which ties nicely into this recent news announcement:
Image



I know that this is a PluginBoutique exclusive deal - but I honestly don't know what to think about this though. If the MSRP is 35USD (at MAAT, plus VAT - still about 35EUR), so what is actually the real at cost value of this plugin?
Facts. Compy Fox may be a little outrageous at times but he is right on here.

Post

original flipper wrote: I recently saw a great deal going for a VSTI for $1!!!
Me too. Bought it and authorised in minutes.
Hey ho. 8)
I wonder what happens if I press this button...

Post

Bought this plugin a while ago. Cause its cheap and I remembered i liked TT meter long ago. But i was shocked by their CP. Lol. Never experienced licensing like that. But it shocked me more when I used the plugin. Theres almost no option, just a link button. Funny, my mind was thinking, is that it? Haha. Well, should have bought Bx_Meter.

Post

If so, I just need to let you know that you will miss out on the market of long time Sequoia users - which is probably also partly your target market! It would take a lot of motivation (in a saturated plugin market) to order a new 3- series Codemeter and work with Magix to transfer our licenses. The new Sequoia v14 supports v1 & 2 dongles - why cannot MAAT? I don't mean to make that sound trivial from a development point of view.
regards
We really would like to be compatible with serial 1 & 2 dongles but unfortunately WiBu does not allow it no matter of the programming skills and affords of our team. It´s politic and need to live with that.
Our more expansive tools will come with a serial 3 dongle and the more dongles are out, the less painful it will be. By that time we recommend to use the file-based licensing scheme. Licenses can we swapped over to dongles at any time.

Post

Hi,

I've no time to read all the long thread because I've just spent more than 1 f**king hour by trying to activate this plugin, if I tried to rob the European central bank I would have done less work and been more successful. It's simply absurd

In addition the correlation meter was removed, gui is better in free original version and I would have expected to see a resize option in this paid version.. honestly.. low price yes but if I could go back I'll take a beer with that money and I'll continue to use the free version :?

Post

To stay strictly on topic (copy protection) ...

I wonder when a dev wants to to do business with users all across the board
why they don`t get in touch with them in advance like on a survey etc.
to locate and address crucial issues users may have.

In this case it could have been done to find out what kind of protection(s) are considered acceptable
and then find a workable compromise between the fundamental idea of the dev and the feedback of users.

It looks like MAAT came to the point to favor a copy protection they think works best for them but not for users across the board
which creates a discrepancy of diverse perceptions and hampers a healthy relationship of users and dev(s).
Intel i7-4790K | Gigabyte Z97X-UD3H | 32GB Crucial Ballistix Sport | RME Babyface Pro | UAD PCIe Octo, Quad | Asus GT 730 | Toshiba DT01ACA200 2TB | LG GH24NSB0 | W10 Pro 64bit | S1 latest

Post

It seems common sense that, if Codemeter really was as fantastic a copy protection solution for developers and users, then it would be more successfully adopted by other companies.

I would welcome MAAT to go soft-iLok (ie: Wave Arts, Soundtoys etc)

Post

Doctor Doubledrop wrote:Hi,

I've no time to read all the long thread because I've just spent more than 1 f**king hour by trying to activate this plugin, if I tried to rob the European central bank I would have done less work and been more successful. It's simply absurd

In addition the correlation meter was removed, gui is better in free original version and I would have expected to see a resize option in this paid version.. honestly.. low price yes but if I could go back I'll take a beer with that money and I'll continue to use the free version :?
Wow.. ..sheer MAATness. :roll:
Whoever wants music instead of noise, joy instead of pleasure, soul instead of gold, creative work instead of business, passion instead of foolery, finds no home in this trivial world of ours.

Post

Omkar wrote:To stay strictly on topic (copy protection) ...

I wonder when a dev wants to to do business with users all across the board
why they don`t get in touch with them in advance like on a survey etc.
to locate and address crucial issues users may have.

In this case it could have been done to find out what kind of protection(s) are considered acceptable
and then find a workable compromise between the fundamental idea of the dev and the feedback of users.

It looks like MAAT came to the point to favor a copy protection they think works best for them but not for users across the board
which creates a discrepancy of diverse perceptions and hampers a healthy relationship of users and dev(s).
You make good points Omkar.

Post Reply

Return to “Effects”