Freesound Forums

I'm confused.
I can do two website themes for one binary content.
I can do one website theme and add a mirror to the binary content.

Mirroring binary content is good, in case that some server goes down.
Then on the website you can add a checkbox to "select another mirror".

Multiple websites could use the same, shared binary content.
That makes multiple access points (interfaces) to one shared content.

But despite the appearance differences (domain, theme, "who we are", widgets, etc.)
- they should offer the same (at least) shared content accesibility.
- and they should "promote" one common content logo ("powered by..."?) for this shared content.
then from multiple websites, one shared content would be available.

But I guess here would appear the rivalship.
"Am I the freesound fan or soundcloud fan?" - asks the user.
"If we want to build our firm potrtrait, then why should we silently support another and similar platform if we don't want to join into oneness with them? (and under what name this oneness should be?)" - asks the admin.

If there is one common idea - that's great. But if parties have different view regarding advertising and earning money - it is probable that one common project won't work. At least that is my point of view.

p.s.: sorry for my english, long time did not used it.

Freesound is awesome how it is now, keep it this way!

I love FreeSound the way it is, i use it mostly for sound design and to gather sfx for independent/ short films/ motion design. I use to use soundsnap back when it was all free, but their switch to being commercial forced me to look elsewhere for sfx. Because freesound has been such a helpful tool for my art/ motion design, I recently just started recoding atmospheres and sfx in-case someone else in the freesound community could use it. (havent cut the samples for upload yet )

I think that as long as the proposed features are optional for freesound members, its a great idea. People use these sites for different things, and it would be a shame to see a community driven media sharing site become corporate.

how do i get started with the sound

i mean how do i download

i mean how do i download

http://www.freesound.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=74

1. Never sell out to another company that sees a profit margrin he or she can get there hands on.
2. Keep freesound orginal.
3. A user for five years becuase website does not make modifications.
4. You will lose half of your customers.
5. The ratings on soundcloud the last time I checked weren't as good as yours.
6.Intergration is taking a big risk...

...but most of all to keep it short, " You will lose your originality and that's what made
freesound a great site in the first place."

Don't sell out, no matter what the polls suggest.

Hi I've been using freesound with all my sound needs (Music, foley Etc) for some time now. Also i've had my Soundcloud for about a year or so. It sounds good that you guys wanna team up with an even bigger company to get yours to launch off because numbers, well, are exciting. But, as a soundcloud user i dont really like it anymore. Once you exceed the amount of minutes on your cloud then you have to start paying and if the sounds i upload on freesound add to that, just makes less room for my music. i say keep it Freesound all the way but if somehow you can incorporate soundcloud without ruining my mins on soundcloud, and without ruining the cool idea of this website then you can have something. give it some good thought because there are other ways to make money off the site. I haven't seen any ads anywhere which is nice, but it wouldn't hurt to have one or two ads for the site. SMALL. NO POPUPS. Hope i could be of some help cheers!

My thoughts about the CC license are these: I have experience with adding to websites. I had been a member of a huge artists community (10 years) and a few years ago the entire website was sold to a publisher. Every idea I had given freely to other artists was now being held hostage on some archival hard drive and it seems now that I have suffered from a gotcha' curse since then.

It could happen here, a sentence could be changed in the CC license and our charitable natures might evolve into a discord of sorts, and the work we love doing would be at the whim of whoever owns THIS site.

-hr

I think the idea is cool, since I can decide for myself wether I want the sound being available in Soundcloud and/or Freesound without extra work.
It gives everybody extra possibilities. No one is obliged though. It's like presenting my music in Myspace, Bandcamp and Soundcloud. Myspace just to present it, Soundcloud to share and present, Bandcamp to sell it.
I don't see real problems, since it is a parallel world, but still different.
I f I search for a sound, I'd still go to Freesound first, since it works better for that purpose. The internet is all about connecting, why not break down the walls that are in way?
It helps Freesound also and therefore more diversity and probably more good sounds. Moderating would probably be more extensive while soundcloud users maybe too easily click the add to FS button, although it's not a sound but music i.e..

I say no!

So glad Freesound is back. I was worried for a while. Got another production coming up.

Keep up the good work.

burkay: great comment. I think people are reading into this too deeply. Too many of you must think it's a form of corporate takeover, like a retail store wants to buy your favourite park and turn it into another retail store.

I think this would be more like making a gate on the fence between two houses. It will be easier for people to get from one house to another, bit nobody is taking your house and you don't have to go there if you don't want to.

I personally think the pros heavily outweight the cons, and many of the disadvantages described previously are merely imagined. This isn't a proposition to make one into the other (at least, I think it isn't). Plus, if Soundcloud were only interested in money, and many people use freesound because it's free - what would they have to gain financially? If people use freesound because they like sharing without restrictions - why restrict ourselves?

i say no. seems like trouble to me.

after one year of discussion i still think freesound must stay by it self..

Anton wrote:
If freesound gets embedding i see no point. I feel there is a conflict in philosophy.

[edit] Would it also work the other way? Allow us to post our soundcloud sounds to freesound?

Guys,

Here are some comments on your toughts...

How about the storage limits on the free SoundCloud accounts?

With an optional “export to SoundCloud” for each uploaded file, it’s obviously up to each user to decide what files to export. For you who upload a lot of content, we would love to see some of it exported and showcased on SoundCloud. Then music creators can find out about Freesounds as a source for new sounds, and sound-makers can find their way into your community.

As a bonus, we can also offer all the existing Freesound users who connect to their SoundCloud accounts within a certain time-frame, 2 hours of extra storage for free. Then you could export up to 4 hours of uncompressed samples without paying.

It’s also important to point out that even though we are commercial, we’re not directly monetizing content in any way and our terms of service prevents us from start doing so. And of course the licenses still applies.

Would it also work the other way, i.e. allow us to post our SoundCloud sounds to Freesound?

As soon as a Freesound account is connected to a SoundCloud account, it’s also easy to import the files. This means a SoundCloud user can find out about Freesound, join the community and import the samples from SoundCloud to his new Freesound account.

What happens if a user changes the CC licence?

This is a general problem for CC licensing and not just related to the fact that you can change your licenses as a SoundCloud user. If a user provides a track under a certain CC license and someone uses that track, the license that was available at the time of use will still apply. So even if we prevented people from changing the license, we cannot prevent them from deleting the track and uploading it again with a different license. The same goes for Freesound content I guess.

You say embedding and sharing, but people will be able to embed and share just as well in Freesound. What is the advantage of having your things in two locations?

With a lot of developers and big investments in infrastructure and new features, we aim to have the best solutions for embedding sounds anywhere on the web. Another incentive for connecting to SoundCloud is that more and more music creation apps are connected via our API. It’s everything from sequencer apps to simple iPhone apps, and when they add features for browsing and using samples, it means that your sounds would be available for music production right away.

All the tracks exported from Freesound will be “tagged” as “uploaded from Freesound”. There is an API feature for filtering out content from a specific “app” which means you could for instance build an app for feeding all the new Freesound content on SoundCloud. Users can also search for Freesound content on SoundCloud.com and if they find samples, they will see that they come from Freesound (with a link back to your site).

There is no advantage of seeing comments/votes/... in two locations, it just makes things more difficult.

There is no voting on tracks on SoundCloud and it would be fairly easy to import the comments on SoundCloud back to the Freesound context.

SoundCloud offers no "original file download" for free account types and has number of downloads per track set to 100.

On a free account, the original file can always be downloaded up to 100 times. If that limit is reached, it’s either an incentive for the user who wants to download the track to head over to Freesound, or for the creator to pay us to get more exposure via SoundCloud. We can potentially do something to give existing Freesound users more downloads per track as well.

Finally...

It’s also worth mentioning that this is a very little development effort and therefore could be worth trying out just to see how the community in general welcomes the feature. Me and one of our developers are going to the Music Hack Day in Barcelona (1st-3rd October) and we think it’s possible to build it over the weekend to try out the feature.

Let me know if you have further questions and ideas!

hi,

just a small notice that we (the core freesound team) decided against doing this integration...
no need to discuss it anymore

- bram

Maybe - it could be useful not to share tracks from one to the other platform - but to make them searchable in eachothers search engines - as an option. If I upload something to SC I could choose the options to make it findable in the FS searchengine and vice versa.

This is done already, but I'm glad how it went. Soundcloud is fine, nothing wrong with them. The difference between Freesound and everything else out there is this: Freesound respects samples and sounds. For the rest, it's a commodity.

While I know the conversation is over...

Freesound needs embedding in order to promote this site more effectively as people will link back here to see where the sound comes from.

Soundcloud looks set to be the audio equivalent of YouTube. In a way it's competing with Freesound for users, it seems to me Freesound has a more field recording/effects/foley heritage while Scoundcloud is music oriented.

I think it's a healthy thing to have these two platforms working independently and pursuing these two paths.
digifish