Talk:Native Instruments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Sync Modular[edit]

One thing that isn't mentioned in the article is that a large part of Reaktor's newer engine was developed by another company for a product called Sync Modular. From what I understand Native Instruments bought out the company that made Sync Modular and eventually hired the lead developer of that product. While I'm not certain, I believe it was between versions 2 and 3 when the Sync Modular code was incorporated.

The following is from the Sonic Spot: (http://www.sonicspot.com/news/00112901.html)

Dr Sync and Native Instruments start a collaboration to bring their experience and technologies together and develop new and innovative audio software.

Due to this reason the future development of SynC Modular is cancelled, except for the bugfixes. Also the amount of email support may be reduced.

As a compensation for the stopped development of SynC Modular, Dr Sync and Native Instruments are providing a copy of Reaktor 2.3 free of charge to users who have registered SynC Modular before November 30, 2000. Alternatively, qualifying users can wait for a free copy of a SynC Modular "compatible" Native Instruments program that may be released in the future.

Registration for SynC Modular will be open again in a few days. Dr Sync and Native Instruments are offering a $49 discount on Reaktor 2.3 to SynC Modular users who have registered after November 30, 2000.

See the SynC Modular web site for more details.

I used to be a user of Sync Modular and the engine was substantially more cpu efficient than the Reaktor engine at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.36.43.177 (talk) 16:09, 5 April 2006‎ (UTC)

I agree with whoever posted Sync Modular comment. At present I am attempting to update Reaktor page with more verifiable information about the software. I thank you for the link, and I'll try to update NI page whenever I'll have the time. — TheEXIT 19:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Traktor merging into this article[edit]

Let me just vote against this. Traktor is substantial and pertinent enough to stand on its own. Dougieb 03:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm voting against the merge as well. --AlexOvShaolin 04:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

An advert[edit]

I feel this article reads too much like an advert. It has the same style as the Native Instruments adverts. I think this article leans too heavily on this article on their website: http://www.native-instruments.com/index.php?id=companyhistory_us. Imo this sentence overstates for instance: "His first idea was both a "new kind of instrument" and a software remake of an old 'cabinet-based' pure analog system. The vision, however, was remarkable". "The company's scope among music artists is diverse and substantial with accolades from users such as Kraftwerk, Trent Reznor and Hans Zimmer", what does it mean when those people are payed to say that which i suspect NI does for their adverts on which this sentence is based. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biggiesmartypants (talkcontribs) 09:22, 14 March 2007‎ (UTC)

I agree - I have added a few fact tags and flagged the page. Sidasta 12:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The artists are not "paid to say" that they use NI instruments. Trent Reznor doesn't need shill money and wouldn't say that he used their stuff when he didn't if they did offer. The fact is that if you know anything about virtual instruments, it is not inconceivable - and in fact is expected that artists of this calibur would be saying these things.Dougieb 02:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Native Instruments seem to be a monopolist. Excluding Traktor there is not a hell of a lot software that fight against. Thus it is a problem not to use NI products. -- 84.132.98.92 14:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason there is no page yet for Guitar Rig? I know (from experience) that a great many musicians use it in live situations, if not in studio. --41.243.8.91 01:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

A second on removing: "The vision, however, was remarkable" it's like the writing on the side of a cereal box "Crunchy wholesome goodness that's just remarkable!" Using wiki as an advert is repulsive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.249.76.73 (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NI Logo.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:NI Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NiOberbaumbruke.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:NiOberbaumbruke.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Forget it! (notability)[edit]

Oh comeon, breath,who said Native Instruments is not notable? Their products are all very good, professional-oriented, high-end and everything :) To be honest, when I first discovered this article, I was very surprised to notice that actual separate articles for each of their products were missing! It's arguable that there are even better products and brands, but these are affordable and very good at the same time. If I was a little less busy, I'd try to work out and add some notability here around, but looks like I've got some English-writing-fright, so it's taking me real long to write anything on English Wikipedia. I decided to move to my local (RO) Wiki and continued to write here only incidentally, but I'd still grow upset if this article be gone. Anyone NI fan? Give us a little help! Who knows, maybe I'll try myself a bit, but I guess it's not me to count on. (Impy4ever (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC))

Just pasting from my comments in on the talk page of the user that made the change:
NI definitely meets notability requirements, even if the article is a bit shoddy. I don't do any significant edits there since I work for them, but here are a few references links just from the first couple pages of google hits: [1], [2], [3]
Feel free to remove the notice and add sources yourself. Again, I simply avoid making edits like that because of potential WP:COI. Scott.wheeler (talk) 05:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I take that back. I am removing it, because, well, it's silly. NI is way over the WP:N threshhold. I'm switching it to a needs citations tag, since they're out there, they just need to be referenced. I left a note on the user page of the guy that inserted the tag should he wish to discuss this here. Scott.wheeler (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

As a reader, let me say that this article is clearly a puff piece written by someone (or ones) at Native Instruments. It has absolutely no credibility with me. There is no useful information here, just a lot of empty words. I wish someone who knows about the company would rewrite this in a neutral tone — and at about one-fourth of the current length. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 22:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Right now it looks like a puff piece but Native instruments are a prominent software company.. Traktor is one of (if not) the most used DJ applications, Guitar Rig is another commonly used program and Reaktor is a very notable product as well. The article needs work, not to be deleted.

This is an ad[edit]

"notable products"? Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.92.140 (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)