Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
Is it correct that a previously unregistered copy of Gigastudio is unusable - that there's no way to activate it since whatever support system for it is gone and activating it required interaction with a website? Or is that not correct?
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On Sun, 18 Dec 2016 22:52:39 -0800 (PST), Brassplyer
wrote: Is it correct that a previously unregistered copy of Gigastudio is unusable - that there's no way to activate it since whatever support system for it is gone and activating it required interaction with a website? Or is that not correct? Gigastudio was bought out by Tascam some years ago...BUT... Kontakt has a converter were you can use those wonderful giga files NI's forum will help you import them. Good Luck! |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 5:42:26 PM UTC-5, ramtazz wrote:
Gigastudio was bought out by Tascam some years ago...BUT... Kontakt has a converter were you can use those wonderful giga files NI's forum will help you import them. Good Luck! By Giga files I take it you mean projects you've previously created with it? Or is that not what you mean? What I was thinking of is using Gigastudio as a new user, never having created anything with it. Is that notion a no-go? |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 22/12/2016 01:46, Brassplyer wrote:
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 5:42:26 PM UTC-5, ramtazz wrote: Gigastudio was bought out by Tascam some years ago...BUT... Kontakt has a converter were you can use those wonderful giga files NI's forum will help you import them. Good Luck! By Giga files I take it you mean projects you've previously created with it? Or is that not what you mean? What I was thinking of is using Gigastudio as a new user, never having created anything with it. Is that notion a no-go? Cut and pasted from homerecording.com, where the same question was asked a couple of days ago.. "Sadly since it is no longer supported at all by Tascam...."IF" you REALLY want to activate it...the only way I can imagine you getting it up and running is to use a Crack and Key generator. Being as it is no longer being sold or supported, I would imagine it is unlikely Tascam is going to come after you for "activating" a legal copy you own ....the biggest issue is having to download some hackers Keygen software to get it to work. I know peeps that have used such key gens successfully and though I don't know anyone it has happened to personally, when using nefarious software like these keygens there's always the risk of bringing a nasty virus into your system with it. If it was me and I REALLY wanted to use the software I'd first use an old PC that is of no real importance to test out and see if the crack software actually works and secondly that it is clean of any virus's before I used it on a machine of any importance. I googled "gigastudio key generator" and there were several results that appear to have key generators BTW I dug a little further and just maybe the following is a working activation number H6F7C21T1KK1JIZ522OF have no idea if it will work but give it a try. " It's up to you if you want to take the risks on a program that is now abandoned by the writers, so would have no support in the future if an OS update breaks it. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 22/12/2016 12:49, John Williamson wrote:
On 22/12/2016 01:46, Brassplyer wrote: On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 5:42:26 PM UTC-5, ramtazz wrote: Gigastudio was bought out by Tascam some years ago...BUT... Kontakt has a converter were you can use those wonderful giga files NI's forum will help you import them. Good Luck! By Giga files I take it you mean projects you've previously created with it? Or is that not what you mean? What I was thinking of is using Gigastudio as a new user, never having created anything with it. Is that notion a no-go? Cut and pasted from homerecording.com, where the same question was asked a couple of days ago.. Looking more closely, I see you were the one asking the question on homrecording.com. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 8:46:11 PM UTC-5, Brassplyer wrote:
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 5:42:26 PM UTC-5, ramtazz wrote: Gigastudio was bought out by Tascam some years ago...BUT... Kontakt has a converter were you can use those wonderful giga files NI's forum will help you import them. Good Luck! By Giga files I take it you mean projects you've previously created with it? Or is that not what you mean? What I was thinking of is using Gigastudio as a new user, never having created anything with it. Is that notion a no-go? From what I read on Gearslutz or whatever it's called, Giga' was discontinued in 2008. To me, audio programs are a dime a dozen. I used both Audacity, if I have to do any "mixing", then finalize in Goldwave ($50 lifetime membership). I'm perfectly satisfied what I can do and the results. Some programs (later called applications, since using legacy names and abbreviations are sometimes criticized here!), they are sort of like Photoshop, where those users had to have the best, but have little knowledge of what it's capable of!! Jack |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
John Williamson wrote:
I googled "gigastudio key generator" and there were several results that appear to have key generators BTW I dug a little further and just maybe the following is a working activation number H6F7C21T1KK1JIZ522OF have no idea if it will work but give it a try. " It's up to you if you want to take the risks on a program that is now abandoned by the writers, so would have no support in the future if an OS update breaks it. A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 22/12/2016 13:42, Scott Dorsey wrote:
John Williamson wrote: A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott Maybe they have, and Tascam have decided not to. Shrug Maybe they also took note of what happened when Adobe sort of released their old stuff into the wild. I wonder how many sales that cost them? -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 12/22/2016 8:42 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. I don't know how much of Gigastudio TASCAM got when they bought it, but it's possible that there are parts of it that they don't really own, but which Giga licensed from someone else who's no longer in business, and that license was transferred to TASCAM without any rights other than to use it in their own version of the product. People have been pestering Mackie to release the code for the hard disk recorders so someone can update them. While Mackie doesn't plan to use that code or anything else in it again, the operating system kernel (which isn't anything common like Windows or Linux) came from elsewhere and they don't own any rights to that other than to distribute it with the product. Everything's compiled into a single file. One of the problems with it is that the driver for graphics card is in the compilation, so only a limited range of cards will work with it, and they're getting scarcer than hen's teeth and aren't clearly identifiable anyway. Replacing parts (including the motherboard) isn't as simple as it is in a plain old Windows PC. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
People have been pestering Mackie to release the code for the hard disk recorders so someone can update them. While Mackie doesn't plan to use that code or anything else in it again, the operating system kernel (which isn't anything common like Windows or Linux) came from elsewhere and they don't own any rights to that other than to distribute it with the product. Everything's compiled into a single file. One of the problems with it is that the driver for graphics card is in the compilation, so only a limited range of cards will work with it, and they're getting scarcer than hen's teeth and aren't clearly identifiable anyway. Replacing parts (including the motherboard) isn't as simple as it is in a plain old Windows PC. The whole _point_ of releasing the code is that it gets the manufacturers hands out of the whole thing. Yeah, it requires a license for the RTOS and a build environment to build the firmware. It's not an easy thing to do. But by releasing the source code, the manufacturer turns it from their problem to the end user's problem. It becomes possible for a third party organization to build the system. If they choose not to do it because it's difficult, it's not Mackie's problem. If they choose not to do it because they can't get source from Mackie, that IS Mackie's problem. The fact that building the code is difficult is a reason _to_ release it, not a reason to avoid releasing it. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 12/22/2016 3:30 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
The whole _point_ of releasing the code is that it gets the manufacturers hands out of the whole thing. Yeah, it requires a license for the RTOS and a build environment to build the firmware. It's not an easy thing to do. But by releasing the source code, the manufacturer turns it from their problem to the end user's problem. But it's easier for the manufacturer to simply say "no longer supported" and let the user decide when it's time to buy a replacement. Some hardware is worth sustaining forever, particularly if it's big enough so that real people with real tools can work on it. The Mackie HDR is in the questionable range - it's a great product, but even with access to the code for the application and the EPROMs, it would be a big job to re-engineer what can't be directly replaced. The Ampex MM-1200 is a different story. Bob Starr has a new servo and tension control system for it, new record and playback cards, and JRF is still making heads, so for double the price of a running chassis, you can have a better-than-new analog multitrack. And for the 50 people who want one, that's probably a good deal. But a software program that was abandoned ten years ago? There's probably something on the market today that does the same job better. They don't care about one guy who has a never-registered copy who can't use it without a hack. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On 23/12/2016 4:16 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 22/12/2016 13:42, Scott Dorsey wrote: John Williamson wrote: A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott Maybe they have, and Tascam have decided not to. Shrug Maybe they also took note of what happened when Adobe sort of released their old stuff into the wild. I wonder how many sales that cost them? My bet is bugger all despite what software companies like Adobe may claim! Most people who use cracks or other methods to obtain commercial software at no cost, would never dream of paying the prices often asked. They would simply use freeware or open source versions if necessary. Same with music, people will often listen to stuff they get for free they would never pay for. Or better still, they listen, find they like it and buy the CD for better quality. Have done that many times. Then of course there are people who use pirated versions of programs they have already paid for rather than go through the often difficult registration process, or non existent process as in the question of this thread. Or sometimes expensive "upgrades" just to get bug fixes. Often it is difficult to determine who the biggest criminals are, the software company or the pirates! :-( Trevor. |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On Thursday, December 22, 2016 at 11:36:35 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
On 23/12/2016 4:16 AM, John Williamson wrote: On 22/12/2016 13:42, Scott Dorsey wrote: John Williamson wrote: A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott Maybe they have, and Tascam have decided not to. Shrug Maybe they also took note of what happened when Adobe sort of released their old stuff into the wild. I wonder how many sales that cost them? My bet is bugger all despite what software companies like Adobe may claim! Most people who use cracks or other methods to obtain commercial software at no cost, would never dream of paying the prices often asked. They would simply use freeware or open source versions if necessary. Same with music, people will often listen to stuff they get for free they would never pay for. Or better still, they listen, find they like it and buy the CD for better quality. Have done that many times. Welcome to the tons of internet oldies radio stations. Jack Then of course there are people who use pirated versions of programs they have already paid for rather than go through the often difficult registration process, or non existent process as in the question of this thread. Or sometimes expensive "upgrades" just to get bug fixes. Often it is difficult to determine who the biggest criminals are, the software company or the pirates! :-( Trevor. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
Trevor wrote:
On 23/12/2016 4:16 AM, John Williamson wrote: On 22/12/2016 13:42, Scott Dorsey wrote: John Williamson wrote: A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott Maybe they have, and Tascam have decided not to. Shrug Maybe they also took note of what happened when Adobe sort of released their old stuff into the wild. I wonder how many sales that cost them? My bet is bugger all despite what software companies like Adobe may claim! Most people who use cracks or other methods to obtain commercial software at no cost, would never dream of paying the prices often asked. Chances are, yes. But I can see somebody wanting to just fool around with something without spending the big bucks to activate it, only to not really use it much after dinking around with it. Sure, you can use the "demo" mode but the "demo" mode usually didn't work very well - they'd insert noise or it would be time limited. If you really want free sample playback, it's not hard to do. Get sforzando and troll around for .sf2 files. There are soundfonts that have the word "giga" in the title; some claim to be based on Gigasampler. If you really need higher quality, you can pay for it. They would simply use freeware or open source versions if necessary. Same with music, people will often listen to stuff they get for free they would never pay for. I did an experiment when I had access to binary newsgroups. I downloaded a bunch of stuff, and it never got listened to. The exception were things that were not available for sale that I would have paid for. I still can't find certain titles in any form. Or better still, they listen, find they like it and buy the CD for better quality. Have done that many times. Exactly. Then of course there are people who use pirated versions of programs they have already paid for rather than go through the often difficult registration process, or non existent process as in the question of this thread. Or sometimes expensive "upgrades" just to get bug fixes. Often it is difficult to determine who the biggest criminals are, the software company or the pirates! :-( Trevor. -- Les Cargill |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 17:19:38 -0600, Les Cargill
wrote: My gig(s) samples work fine in Kontakt. Free and Paid for Versions. Bill Trevor wrote: On 23/12/2016 4:16 AM, John Williamson wrote: On 22/12/2016 13:42, Scott Dorsey wrote: John Williamson wrote: A lot of folks are running software like that. I'm surprised given the popularity of Gigastudio that people have not been petitioning Tascam to release the source code into the wild under license. --scott Maybe they have, and Tascam have decided not to. Shrug Maybe they also took note of what happened when Adobe sort of released their old stuff into the wild. I wonder how many sales that cost them? My bet is bugger all despite what software companies like Adobe may claim! Most people who use cracks or other methods to obtain commercial software at no cost, would never dream of paying the prices often asked. Chances are, yes. But I can see somebody wanting to just fool around with something without spending the big bucks to activate it, only to not really use it much after dinking around with it. Sure, you can use the "demo" mode but the "demo" mode usually didn't work very well - they'd insert noise or it would be time limited. If you really want free sample playback, it's not hard to do. Get sforzando and troll around for .sf2 files. There are soundfonts that have the word "giga" in the title; some claim to be based on Gigasampler. If you really need higher quality, you can pay for it. They would simply use freeware or open source versions if necessary. Same with music, people will often listen to stuff they get for free they would never pay for. I did an experiment when I had access to binary newsgroups. I downloaded a bunch of stuff, and it never got listened to. The exception were things that were not available for sale that I would have paid for. I still can't find certain titles in any form. Or better still, they listen, find they like it and buy the CD for better quality. Have done that many times. Exactly. Then of course there are people who use pirated versions of programs they have already paid for rather than go through the often difficult registration process, or non existent process as in the question of this thread. Or sometimes expensive "upgrades" just to get bug fixes. Often it is difficult to determine who the biggest criminals are, the software company or the pirates! :-( Trevor. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
If you're a new user, I'd say don't start.
The only reason to use Giga these days is if - like me - you have Giga libraries you still like. Sampling has advanced a lot since then, both the technology and the quality of the libraries. But there are some great Giga libraries that are still great. In the Giga days, each machine could access about 1.5GB out of 2GB of installed RAM - and getting beyond 1GB required a minor hack. That's why people had stacks of Windows XP sample slaves (I have four, and my guess is that two of them might even start up.) In other words, even though Giga was the first streaming sampler (meaning it played back hard drives, allowing recordings of unlimited length), you still needed to load instruments/articulations into a head start RAM buffer. That meant only a few instruments per machine. The other thing that's advanced the technology is scripting. Sample library developers are doing a lot of amazing things with that these days, especially in Native Instruments Kontakt. That makes everything a lot more playable and expressive. So I'd suggest not getting started in Giga. Even if you can get it to run under a current OS version, you're at the dead end of the road before you even start. |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gigastudio unusable?
^ several typos, but you get the idea.
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Colossus vs GigaStudio? | Pro Audio | |||
Gigastudio 3.0 Orchestra | Pro Audio | |||
Gigastudio compatibility | Pro Audio | |||
gigastudio 3 & nforce 4 | Pro Audio | |||
Best interface for GigaStudio? | Pro Audio |