Roland Fantom EX, Kemper profiler are two recent examples of paid feature upgrades; is this becoming the next thing in hardware music tech?
Let’s talk about updates/upgrades. If you buy a purely analog instrument, you get it as it is. Digital music technology is different. Unlike analog tech, digital hardware can be updated or upgraded using newer firmware. The same applies to hybrid instruments.
Many developers use this. This ranges from minor bug fixes to smaller updates or even major feature upgrades, raising the device to a new level. Thanks to modern technology, the latter has become increasingly common.
Better Technologies Better Architectures
Digital technology has made significant strides in performance, efficiency, and flexibility in recent years. Just seeing what a Raspberry Pi (Korg wavestate…) can do for little money is impressive.
We are moving away from fixed architectures towards flexible, extensible engines. These allow developers to craft more sophisticated products with more features and higher audio and function quality. Plus, it opens the door for easy updates, enabling products to evolve.
Prime examples include the Arturia MicroFreak, Korg Logue and its plugins, Novation Circuit (OG), Synstrom Audible Deluge, Expert Sleeping Disting series, and more. These are all massively expanded products with little to do with the original product feature set.
But will this feature giveaway continue in the future, or will there be a significant shift towards a new business model? I say yes to the latter.
Paid Upgrades?!
Many developers are playing with the new possibilities and spoiling customers with constant new features. This is particularly positive and welcome as it keeps hardware up to date. In addition, you protect the environment by not constantly releasing new products.
What is often forgotten is that this lovely update rush also costs developers resources (money and time). This could change in the future, as we can already see in some companies. Three recent examples show that you can charge money for these upgrades, not updates.
Roland Fantom EX, KEMPER Profiler Player, Akai Pro STEM…
Almost a year ago, in November, Roland introduced the Fantom EX engine. After many free updates, it was a paid upgrade for 229€ for existing Fantom (6,7,8) users. This introduced, among other things, the next generation of ACB, bringing new instruments, etc.
This is an almost mandatory purchase for the Fantom community because Roland is basing all future updates on this new EX engine and is no longer on the initial core. Roland also confirmed this in an inquiry.
The newest example comes from the German company Kemper, which developed the Access Virus Synthesizer. The Profiler Player is a huge success as it packs much of the popular Profiler amplifier into a portable pedal.
Last week, the news made users sit up and take notice. Kemper has announced new two-level paid upgrades for the Profiler Player guitar amplifier. The first one has FXs from the big brother, morphing capabilities, etc. The second one has more FX slots, rig spillover, looper, and more.
What is interesting is how they are offering it to existing customers. Upgrading to level II for 179€ is available to everyone, whereas level III, which retails at 149€, is only available to users of level 2. You can also put 299€ on the table and get both upgrades simultaneously.
A more minor example is Akai Pro with the new STEM separation add-on for the MPC hardware, for which they charge 9.99€.
This trio example shows that you can charge money for new hardware features. But that’s nothing new and something we have been familiar with since the software world began. See Arturia V Collection, NI Komplete, DAWs… There are paid upgrades/updates everywhere.
Why I would support it
These three new examples show that this could also become the norm in digitally powered hardware. If that happens, I would support it to a certain extent.
I would welcome it if companies charge an upgrade fee for products with unused power and potential, thus extending their lifespan. Roland shows nicely what they can get out of the older Fantom hardware. I’m sure that a lot more would be possible with many synthesizers.
A paid upgrade can unlock new synthesis options, more effects, and deeper modulators. Why not if the price is fair and matches the offer? Developing new features costs resources and manpower. A critical factor for mini-companies. This could be used to finance further developments.
Whether the paid upgrades are worth the money or just a money craber option for the developer depends on what they contain. Nobody has asked for paid upgrades for simple bug fixes or minor improvements.
They are essential and should always be free so the customer has a properly working device, as promised. These are updates not upgrades. But if the developer adds major features and takes the product to a new level, I’m very open to it. Especially if it has been on the market for several years
For the Future
One thing is certain: The time of big sales like 2020-2022 is over, and developers worldwide need to reconsider the actual release rhythm. The music tech market is weakening, and all hardware or software developers are seeing fewer sales.
Something that small and big companies confirmed to me in many conservation at Superbooth 24. In my opinion, the market is returning to normality where it was before 2020.
Paid upgrades would be an intriguing prospect for companies. Instead of flooding the market with more products, they can upgrade and keep their existing portfolio alive. By offering attractive upgrades, they also have a revenue stream without this almost absurd current product release rhythm.
I think we will see more companies charging for major firmware upgrades. Only time will tell how large the number will be. As of now, I see this happening less with small companies and more with big players.
This is mainly because they often have better mature architectures (Roland Cloud…) that could incorporate such options, including protection against piracy. I think it will be fascinating to see how software in a hardware shell will develop in the future. I’m pretty sure this is just the beginning.
Gut gesagt Tom. I don’t have a problem with a company charging for new features, but ONLY if the initial version works like it’s supposed to. The product should be complete to an agreed-to level. Today, too many customers end up paying to be beta testers, which isn’t right either.
The updated phone app for the Kemper Profiler Player can’t even access the extra patches unlocked by the updates. I emailed Kemper Support and their reply: Development is working on it. So yes, we are paying to be beta testers for products not ready but released anyway to shaft loyal customers out of big bucks 🙁
Instrument updates extend the commercial life of a product. The Microfreak is viable in 2024 because it has been updated so many times. It also demonstrates an ongoing commitment to a product. Both aspects lead to further sales. It is an extension of product marketing.
To charge existing customers for these updates is a low act. Instead of rewarding customers for their original purchase you are cynically milking a captive audience.
Even worse, it’s a very small step from this to a “subscription hardware” model. In that system your hardware would shut down to some minimal state unless there was confirmation of a monthly payment.
Roland has bee on a weird path for years now so I’m not surprised to see this latest move.
H9 Max “Includes all future algorithm releases at no additional cost”
Yes, the H9 MAX but the previous H9 versions (Basic/standard) were dependent of in-app purchases.
Just clarifying since another commenter stated that Eventide were charging H9 max owners a fee for these.
You forgot to add Eventide also does this with the H9 Max which also sells “algorithms” like Backhole and Spacetime via the app for $20 a pop.
While on paper this seems like a smart way for the companies to profit off already sold good, the issue is that when we start to give this type of ownership to companies on things we already bought it can develop is all sorts of ways. For example, the Sonos “Recycle Mode” controversy that happened a few years ago. Sonos offered a program called “Trade Up,” where customers could trade in older Sonos devices for a discount on newer ones. However, to participate in the program, customers had to put their old devices into a mode called “Recycle Mode.” Once a device was put into Recycle Mode, it was permanently deactivated after 21 days, making it unusable, even if it was still in perfect working order. Peloton and their stationary bikes, particularly when they introduced a change regarding their “Just Run” feature? There are plenty issues about this stuff.
I think this could easily morph into a way of way of basically us buying a hardware device that we in a way rent out be is as a subscription of by having companies keep too much control over the devices we buy. The business models are there and the hardware we use to make music are nowadays the same as a Sonos or a Peloton, a computer with wifi.
Companies would need to be upfront about what the device capabilities are and where their reach ends so we dont end with expensive paperweights. You can do it the right way by having open source like the Korg open-source platform Multi-Engine, which allows for significant customization and expandability. its in the Minilogue XD the NTS-1, the new Kaoss pedal (forgot the name) with Korg even giving out the SDK to do this stuff. Some people do them for free, other sell the code for a few bucks to to whatever they want to charge. Same happens with Reaktor and Max for Live.
If companies what to sell unfinished or gimped devices that has been deliberately restricted or had its full potential held back with features locked behind paywalls, reserved for higher-tier products, or disabled for marketing reasons or designed to be for subscription models or software lockdowns it is just a sleazy tactic and they should get zero dollars.
Just charge whatever it is upfront, strategize and include in that price future support and make devices that actually last and not endup in landfills in a few years. Sorry for the long post but this subject/business model is just the worst.
Charging for an update and new funcionalities one thing. Another is if you can transfer it to a new owner. If you spend several hundred $ on the sound extensions, and then a new synth owner must spend again, then this is a dirty game against the users.
They want more money on loyal customers who bought their beta hardware, with unfinished functions and bugs, and when it works as it should have (more or less, many bugs are still there), they charge you for new function. I have no problem with that: I boycott these clowns and go full VST and cheap hardware like Behringer that are very good, even if they won’t last decades (that being said, prove me that more expensive brands will last decades). In the end, I will only support software companies like Steinberg or Ableton. They are providing us working tools, excellent VST and a full bundle to make music. On a Mac you can have many tracks with effects and the computer works without heating. No noise, no fan, full power, and the software works fine, with some reasonable paid updates from time to time. With Cubase or Ableton and a MIDI keyboard, you can produce a whole album, with analog to digital to orchestral sounds, and everything works fine. I will not pay for VST in a box anymore. They were more practical and reliable than computers ten years ago. Tody, most of the time computers are better than hardware. Behringer understood exactly what the music business will be. Waldorf, Sequential or Groove Synthesis are pretty smart IMHO because they are producing an incredible harware, yes expensive however without sacrificing quality at all. KORG released quite incredible synth at a good price and very good VST too. The others, instead of upping their hardware quality, are screwing their customer, trying to reinvent a business model that will fail. They are already dead.
I heard that they were going to sell the fully upgraded player at the regular price soon to compete with the free Tonex upgrade.
I emailed them after paying for their upgrade and said I would spearhead or join a class action lawsuit against them to get my money back if they did so without a rebate to the paying upgraders.