"Vintage" synth project: Kurzweil 2600

[enigmahack]

Hey everyone.

I wanted to reach out generally because I have an idea for a project but wanted to put out feelers for interest and potential legalities.

My project is basically to 'import' the Kurzweil 2600 into the Kronos. I used to have an extensive sound library on my old Kurzweil but when I got my PC3K8, it turns out (much to my complete and utter horror since I sold my beloved, and fully loaded, K2500XS to get the PC3K8) that the sounds are not compatible. My samples will load but my complicated programming sounds don't come over, don't sound right, some key mappings are off, some samples simply don't exist, etc.

So my plan: I'm going to sell my PC3K8 and try and get a Kurzweil 2600XS fully loaded. Hell, if someone had a fully loaded K2600XS or K2600X, I would take the loss and do a direct trade.

Anyway, that's beside the point of what I want to do.

I seeing as how the Kurzweil 2600 is discontinued and has been for a long time now, I wanted to basically take the entire ROM, sample it all and move it all over into the Kronos. It doesn't bring over the VAST engine obviously, but there were some really good samples within the ROM of the Kurzweil that I wanted in my Kronos (which will help with my library reproduction on the Kronos as well)

How legal or illegal would this be if I tried to sell it though? It's definitely a long-term project that I'm going to do, but because it'll be a metric butt-ton of work, I figured I might sell it as a library unless it's not legal to do so, in which case I'll just keep it for myself.

Does anyone have experience in this area or know generally if this is or is not possible?

[GregC]

Hey everyone.

I wanted to reach out generally because I have an idea for a project but wanted to put out feelers for interest and potential legalities.

My project is basically to 'import' the Kurzweil 2600 into the Kronos. I used to have an extensive sound library on my old Kurzweil but when I got my PC3K8, it turns out (much to my complete and utter horror since I sold my beloved, and fully loaded, K2500XS to get the PC3K8) that the sounds are not compatible. My samples will load but my complicated programming sounds don't come over, don't sound right, some key mappings are off, some samples simply don't exist, etc.

So my plan: I'm going to sell my PC3K8 and try and get a Kurzweil 2600XS fully loaded. Hell, if someone had a fully loaded K2600XS or K2600X, I would take the loss and do a direct trade.

Anyway, that's beside the point of what I want to do.

I seeing as how the Kurzweil 2600 is discontinued and has been for a long time now, I wanted to basically take the entire ROM, sample it all and move it all over into the Kronos. It doesn't bring over the VAST engine obviously, but there were some really good samples within the ROM of the Kurzweil that I wanted in my Kronos (which will help with my library reproduction on the Kronos as well)

How legal or illegal would this be if I tried to sell it though? It's definitely a long-term project that I'm going to do, but because it'll be a metric butt-ton of work, I figured I might sell it as a library unless it's not legal to do so, in which case I'll just keep it for myself.

Does anyone have experience in this area or know generally if this is or is not possible?

I have no experience with Kurz but I have worked for hardware and software cos for decades. all of then were serious about enforcing their IP. Either with new or old product.

The boring answer is to read the Kurzweil agreement. Then determine if its worth the risk. Or you could simply reach out to Kurzweil directly. Its their copied property you are brain storming on for potential sales. They might ask for a royalty % and an agreement.

[enigmahack]

Thanks Greg,

I was considering that anyway as well. It just makes me curious because older synths have been 'reproduced' as a sample library for years now by various companies. I totally understand the IP thing, so maybe the best bet is to go to Kurzweil directly and ask.

I really can't see there being an issue if I do it for my own purposes, especially if I own the synth... But the selling part might be a concern.

Let me get the ball rolling and see. I'll read through their TOS and see what they say as well.

[enigmahack]

I emailed Kurzweil directly and they were super-fast to getting a response back to me about this:


Thanks for asking.
Basically what you are wanting to do is not allowed if you plan on selling the results. Personal use is fine but not for the purpose of resale. Kurzweil's sounds are copyright property of Kurzweil Music Systems. The sound recordings and the programming are all property of KMS. A license is granted to the end user to use them in musical compositions and created works, but not extended to unlawfully copy those sounds and resell them to anyone.

This is pretty standard stuff and is covered under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA).

Please let me know if you need further assistance.



So I can't sell my work. That's totally fair, I'm going to look into the DMCA regarding releasing it though. If I do all this work and release it for free whereas I'm not making a profit that takes away from Kurzweil, maybe that's still OK.

I'll look into it more but I imagine it's probably fine.

[jeremykeys]

I would guess it would be fine as long as nobody else decides to sell it after the fact but by then you have no control of it. Sounds like more work than I would consider. Good luck!

[GregC]

I would guess it would be fine as long as nobody else decides to sell it after the fact but by then you have no control of it. Sounds like more work than I would consider. Good luck!

yep, there are characters who pirate stuff on eBay . They eventually get a cease and desist letter and blow up their account.

[Mellontikos]

As a guy who has sampled the Korg 01/W and Yamaha SY99 sounds that I like the most from those synths (not to mention a couple of Kurzweil PC2 sounds, like the phenomenal piano), I can tell you it's a LOT of work for what you would get back trying to sell your work.

I seem a gazillion sample CD's on Ebay, all claiming to be "masterfully sampled". I've bought a couple, and 90% of them suck. I've gotten lucky with a few (A guy sampled a bunch of Access Virus patches in 24bit, and they sound phenomenal). But you'll never sell enough to make up for the work.

The true benefit is to have those samples to be used anywhere you want.

Like right now I have my favorite 01/W and SY99 sounds on my Tyros 4. I've actually had people come over and search where I'm hiding an 01/W rack, or a DX7 Rack, lol.

[Joe Gerardi]

Rather than use the K2600, I think you'd be better off with the K2661. The last incarnation, it has every option available for the K2xxx series, hence it has the most complete soundset.

From the Kurz site:
"The internal sound ROM includes all of the samples from the K2600, the K2600's Orchestral and Contemporary ROM options, and a General MIDI 1 sound set."

Find the triple-strike Stereo Dynamic Piano, and Vintage Electric Pianos ROMs and you have everything Kurzweil there can be.

And, it's in a 61-key format.

..Joe

[danmusician]

So I can't sell my work. That's totally fair, I'm going to look into the DMCA regarding releasing it though. If I do all this work and release it for free whereas I'm not making a profit that takes away from Kurzweil, maybe that's still OK.

I'll look into it more but I imagine it's probably fine.

Giving away copyrighted work does not make it legal. You might not be making a profit, but your "Gift" takes potential sales away from the copyright owner. It's not just that they don't want you to make profit, they don't want you taking theirs either. Which, of course, is only fair.

[Rich Z]

I'm not an intellectual properties attorney, and haven't stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently, but I really doubt a particular sound made by a synthesizer can be copyrighted or trademarked. The NAME of the sound used in a commercial sense, yes, but not the sound itself.

It's probably similar to the case of character typefaces where the typeface itself cannot be copyrighted, but the font NAME used for the typeface can be.

It would be like trying to copyright an E Major chord made from a Hammond B3 organ with a certain number of drawbars being used.

IMHO, of course.

[enigmahack]

Rather than use the K2600, I think you'd be better off with the K2661. The last incarnation, it has every option available for the K2xxx series, hence it has the most complete soundset.

From the Kurz site:
"The internal sound ROM includes all of the samples from the K2600, the K2600's Orchestral and Contemporary ROM options, and a General MIDI 1 sound set."

Find the triple-strike Stereo Dynamic Piano, and Vintage Electric Pianos ROMs and you have everything Kurzweil there can be.

And, it's in a 61-key format.

..Joe

Thanks Joe,

I've actually been contemplating that deeply, since the majority of my libraries are on CD but easily movable to a USB stick (And the 2661 uses smart-media cards)

The only reason I hesitate with this option is because I personally can't stand 61 key keyboards. If I could have my way, all of my boards would be 88 keys... There are times where I'd be happy to take my Kurzweil to a gig with me instead of my Kronos due to the nature of the gig, but I'm not doing that with a 61 key board.

If it were delegated *only* to the studio, then I definitely would. Hell, I'm still considering it an option. I've also considered the 2600R but that's almost harder to find with the options I want.

[JohnDonovan]

I'm not an intellectual properties attorney, and haven't stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently, but I really doubt a particular sound made by a synthesizer can be copyrighted or trademarked. The NAME of the sound used in a commercial sense, yes, but not the sound itself.

It's probably similar to the case of character typefaces where the typeface itself cannot be copyrighted, but the font NAME used for the typeface can be.

It would be like trying to copyright an E Major chord made from a Hammond B3 organ with a certain number of drawbars being used.

IMHO, of course.

In the case of an analogue synth you may have a point, but on a sample based machine they'll own the copyright to the original recordings.

[Thoraldus]

So I can't sell my work. That's totally fair, I'm going to look into the DMCA regarding releasing it though. If I do all this work and release it for free whereas I'm not making a profit that takes away from Kurzweil, maybe that's still OK.

I'll look into it more but I imagine it's probably fine.

Giving away copyrighted work does not make it legal. You might not be making a profit, but your "Gift" takes potential sales away from the copyright owner. It's not just that they don't want you to make profit, they don't want you taking theirs either. Which, of course, is only fair.

Very true, I think the courts in the US have found that a person who gives away copyrighted material still benefits from the non-monetary intangibles.

[enigmahack]

So where is the line drawn then?

If I sample a sound used in the Kurzweil and integrate that sample into a sound I've created, is that unlawful? I'm injecting my own IP but by using something provided by Kurzweil. I'm allowed to use the 2600 in my recordings and make money from that.

What about if I recreated the sounds of the Kurzweil, but using no samples whatsoever. I'm recreating the sounds very similarly using the ideas and IP from Kurzweil however using no actual materials made by them?

What about a combination of both?

What if I sample the entire ROM from the Kurzweil, but inject a bunch of my own programming (since the engines are totally different) and re-create the sounds from the Kurzweil, however not exclusively using their own samples.

All of this aside from the monetary aspect, I'm just unclear about the entirety of where the line is drawn between being able to use the sounds within the Kurzweil as well as the Kurzweil engine itself -vs- bringing those samples into another synthesizer (which, AFAIK is within my rights to do).

At what point am I crossing a line for a synth that Kurzweil doesn't even sell anymore?

[JohnDonovan]

So where is the line drawn then?

If I sample a sound used in the Kurzweil and integrate that sample into a sound I've created, is that unlawful? I'm injecting my own IP but by using something provided by Kurzweil. I'm allowed to use the 2600 in my recordings and make money from that.

What about if I recreated the sounds of the Kurzweil, but using no samples whatsoever. I'm recreating the sounds very similarly using the ideas and IP from Kurzweil however using no actual materials made by them?

What about a combination of both?

What if I sample the entire ROM from the Kurzweil, but inject a bunch of my own programming (since the engines are totally different) and re-create the sounds from the Kurzweil, however not exclusively using their own samples.

All of this aside from the monetary aspect, I'm just unclear about the entirety of where the line is drawn between being able to use the sounds within the Kurzweil as well as the Kurzweil engine itself -vs- bringing those samples into another synthesizer (which, AFAIK is within my rights to do).

At what point am I crossing a line for a synth that Kurzweil doesn't even sell anymore?

Well you're fine making your own music, but it's when you start redistributing Kurzweils samples (for free or otherwise) to other people who haven't purchased the Kurzweil synth & the sounds contained within it.

The same thing you're describing happens beyond just synth sounds too of course. Think of any number of records: e.g. Queens bassline from Under Pressure has been sampled and used many times, but just because someone's added other stuff to it and made their own record doesn't mean they don't have to pay Queen for using the original sample