So, i want to clear up the air about this. I've began to step foot on another DAW because audiotool's DAW is simply not enough for what i want to do with it sometimes. It's still fun to use it, but i still find myself using other DAWs. How do I bridge the gap between my fans on audiotool and my fans outside of audiotool?
The audiotool's sample upload terms of services states you cannot upload: "Full songs made in other DAWs or fully-fledged music loops (Keep in mind that audiotool is about learning and sharing music. It is not just another music publishing platform such as SoundCloud)" Edit: This has since been removed because of this board post
And yet I don't see this get moderated at all sometimes, some people are ok with it too. I've uploaded my bitwig demo mixes here which clearly violate the terms of service. Moderators have seen these tracks as well and there is zero issues.
From what i've discussed in the past, the main issues seem to be that non-audiotool music is usually very controversial when it sounds better than most audiotool music or that non-audiotool music is on the charts.
A great solution for one of these problems would be to have an option to disable a track to hit the charts either by a moderator or manually as a user before publishing.
What do you think about non-audiotool music on audiotool? I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on the board and also to fill out this form: (link is only visible to registered users) What features could the devs add?
My personal opinion is that it shouldn't be allowed unless you do what i do ;-) unix_fly - audiotool stems edition Kind of biased, but the idea is:
- Tell people to not favourite, so it does not go on the charts
- Provide a remixable project to play around with
Create an account or Login to write a comment.
-
-
Trust me I put a butt ton of effort into FL also.
I could start breaking up my FL mels into stems.
I just post FL beats when I am burnt out on AT and vice versa
-
Feel free to keep discussing the pros and cons here. We are learning from the perspectives you share.
Our take on this topic: Stem Upload on Audiotool
-
out of 6 people, here is the current data quantified
-
gotcha. thanks for explaning
-
Oh, yes let me be the first to admit that this pie chart isn't that accurate. People can vote multiple choice so it may look like the majority of people are ok with tracks being treated as demos/stems but there is the possibility to have the majority vote saying that no foreign tracks are ok.
Some people also voted "no foreign tracks" and demos/stems which doesn't make sense at all. Next time i think i will make a better form. If this goes anywhere more serious, I'll make a revised version. The goal for this form is to get an idea about people's opinions because the subject is ambiguous
-
In the Google form, the option to vote is called "Demo mixes/30second clip of non-audiotool tracks are ok" so people are ok with 30s previews or demo mixes which are unfinished tracks at full length mixed together into a single track. Like this: bitwig demo reel vol.1
-
-
The criticism of the site not being another publishing platform is a very valid one though. Those who put in a ton of work in this studio, not having the plugins and other resources that make things sound good and would likely be overrun and outdone by those who "made something" (I could see this being a big copyright issue) or just use a superior DAW (in some aspects). Those who'd have to put a lot of effort into AT tracks sounding good would be pushed below. I know this is bias, but I don't think it's right to make this another streaming platform (worst case scenario). I know that's just my opinion, but I just don't want to see the next "sample track" hit #1 on the charts. I tolerate demos or recorded stuff, but I think there's a good reason why this site has been said to not be another "publishing platform".
-
yk ive been thinking about this a lot and i feel like i dont have a firm enough opinion on it anymore. external tracks bother me and i dont hand them likes but im grappling with whether or not i just feel obligated to defend the status quo and am allergic to the site's culture changing or if its a legitimate issue that injures the site and its community. when i see external tracks it feels like the latter but that might just be because of the former. i dont know!!!
it's been bothering me because then i can't figure out the rules for navigating the site with this law in effect. it feels kind of miserable policing people for "misusing" the site all the time. i believe it's wrong, but then i should be consistent--yet i feel prudish and hostile enforcing it. it doesnt feel like a healthy way to interact with people
-
i was gonna say that they should include a report option for it, so moderators dont have to waste time seeking the tracks out themselves. then i double checked your citation and saw the edit. ig they dgaf about this issue bc why change TOS to un-acknowledge it?
-
"have an option to disable a track to hit the charts either by a moderator or manually as a user before publishing."
The idea on paper works, but once you think about the fact that:
1. The sheer amount of tracks uploaded to the site is larger than a reasonable human workforce could moderate, even now, and especially in the future.
2. If this is an opt-in setting, some people will naturally not tick the box, and allow themselves to chart as a non-audiotool track, and the issue would not change.
As much as I don't wanna mention it, since it's nice to have it, I also can't think of a better solution for the problem that people wouldn't be able to circumvent. I think the best course of action to prevent this is to remove orange colored (unsafe) samples from the library, and disable sample uploads to all but the most verified of users, like they did a very long time ago. Tough pill to swallow, but if your goal is to prevent non-audiotool tracks charting, that would technically solve the issue. However, I do also understand that it would stifle creativity.
-
Yeah, if we didn't have the "unsafe" samples, we wouldn't have AT as we know it.
Every genre on here has been helped out by the unsafe samples.
-
Sure, go ahead. Also my bad
-
I wasn't saying we shouldn't discuss it, I was simply stating why I think that particular suggestion wouldn't work. Do discuss! in fact, I wanna be proven wrong on more negative topics like this. Hell, I wouldn't feel so negatively about the idea of a second samplepocalypse if audiotool develops more robust sampling tools, and does more partnerships with sample companies. I should write a board topic on this, shouldn't I?
-
-
That disable suggestion for non-AT tracks is good
I like that a lot
Yeah, I agree with you word for word on here
-
Here's my stance: I've always been against uploading full songs from another DAW to Audiotool. Audiotool has incredible potential and you can make some mind-blowing songs here, but ultimately, it's just not as great as the popular DAWs (yet). Due to this, I fear that people will take advantage. Some people will take the time to learn Audiotool's studio and make some crazy stuff, but as the site grows and more artists join us, I believe a vast majority will disregard it almost entirely. Why should they take the time and effort to learn to use this studio? Assuming it was fully allowed, they could make music more easily and efficiently due to their access to superior tools, all beyond this site's capabilities. New artists can take advantage of the small yet close-knit userbase by uploading their backlog of releases, breaking the charts with the number of users who are blown away. This will repeat until the site gets diluted with external songs, making it more streaming service than a hybrid DAW & community. Most artists just want to promote their stuff and get big, and this is an effortless way to do it while it's still early and we're all so close. The music's good, but Audiotool loses a part of itself in the process. I don't want this site to become something like Soundcloud, and Audiotool's studio to become a legacy tool or just something to make minor edits to existing songs.
I think it'd be acceptable with moderation to prevent people from taking advantage in these ways. You did point out your idea for favorites and charting which I respect. I also don't have a problem with songs being partly made here and elsewhere. I'm not sure how I feel about stems, but it's definitely a plus in this case.
-
By the way, forgot to mention but i like the idea of the external link to go listen to the music outside of audiotool, but it would need to be within the users track page without being segregated
-
That's ok, sorry if I'm too pushy on this feature. My goal is simply to gather ideas and solutions for all the concerns
-
Sorry if what I said came off as a dismissal. That wasn't my intention; I'm extremely wary of the potential drawbacks of this change, and I want to stress caution. I wasn't only speaking of the negatives; I mentioned that I became more open to the idea of allowing external songs here, but I neglected to acknowledge your ideas, which I wanted to let you know, aren't bad at all. I did pitch an idea of my own too as to how this could be implemented, but perhaps it wasn't what you had in mind. What you mentioned about reputation and new users needing to interact and use the DAW first is something I think can work too, alongside the tag for it being external, and exemption from the charts (They could have their own charts even).
-
-
one sec, @a-records help us out here
-
That decision needs to be explained, in my opinion. For the democracy of this site. Some people find this issue pretty important.
-
Respectfully, that's the stupidest decision Audiotool could make at this point. It will legitimize everything you guys have done in the past to keep this site from being overrode with copyright and songs that just simply aren't AT. What's the point of the sample-pocalypse, and adding limits and making sure AT is an AT-styled place to make music if you're just going to remove all these rules and limitations and let users go free? Just seems stupid in my eyes.
-
The bullet point in the terms is outdated and will be removed
-
I appreciate this post -
Based on my own bias, I think about stems as just longer samples I can mangle in AT — not a means to literally import an entire song made in a different DAW. But I see the concerns stated here
I think I agree with the argument against encouraging full importation of songs as it does work against the communal aspect and novelty of AT itself
I often try to see the motive behind a company’s decisions. Based on AT’s partnerships as evident with the current competitions going on, it seems more tactical to allow this so that AT can participate in more stem-based remix competitions for publicity