New Modules


When I look back at the Kickstarter campaign on the SSP for votes on modules, a lot of these modules got me excited about the future of the SSP. In view of the recent campaign, I got thinking about what I would like to see and the idea that I would be happy to pay for a module, now I know this isn’t mega bucks at moment, but every little helps and how this would increase consumer interest when you are looking to release the next mSSP campaign. I therefore put it to you and forum if this is of interest and can happen.

I would like to see @2disbetter, Matt put out another vote to the forum and the highest voted modules get put into production and there could be different price ranges based on how advanced/complex the module is to develop, time is money! I was excited at Matt’s consideration to developing the Mutable Instrument ranges and I was more than happy to pay for these.
As an example only, if I could have a Steiner Parker filter, or a surround panner module at a reasonable amount against the cost of hardware in the SSP, it would be worth every penny/dollar/euro, or whatever the currency used.

What modules are in development and what modules are to come in the future would then make the mSSP far more attractive and earn some cash along the way, and in the future. I personally was looking forward to having one SSP and two mSSP’s (I nearly backed more) in my system because of what I see going forward.

Anyway, I will leave this for everyone’s opinion if any of above is worthy of consideration/discussion.


1 Like

Any ideas are welcome of course, thanks for giving this some thought. Happy holidays!

If all the modules in the list I referred can happen, put them out to vote to establish most common.

I see this the same as the purchase of a computer, and then having to purchase VST instruments/effects, and the price range could possibly reflect that of the market and how much time required to develop. You will need beta testers and possibly an introductory price to incorporate early development of each module.

Every module referred in the aforementioned list I would like to see in the SSP, I would then need to consider more hardware to make use of them all.

You could consider selling your hardware with included modules on a tier basis, and different tiers that include more, but the more successful modules would still have to be purchased separately (on a requirement basis). There are a few successful brands doing just that.

In addition, other developers would then see earning potential.

here are a few other ideas to fund development of modules or features -

  1. Put the modules or features in a list, each with a $ amount that needs to be raised before we can implement them. You can choose to pay for some of the features or modules, and if we reach the necessary amount then we can implement the modules or features. There doesn’t have to be any “deadline” per se. We could clean up the list every quarter for stuff that doesn’t get funded. There have been some open source projects that use this model. You can decide whether you want to fund development of a feature or module yourself or whether you want to split the cost with other people or the community.
  2. Figure out a subscription model where you get new modules and features as long as you’re a subscriber. At any point you can decide whether you want to subscribe and get the new stuff or whether what you have is adequate for your workflow. Depending on how many subscribers we have we can go faster or slower with development of new stuff.

These are just rough ideas, any suggestions or thoughts are welcome. I don’t know what other pro audio companies are doing and what models work and which don’t.


1, very much like a kickstarter, which I agree to a point,
2, I do like this idea, this way all modules would be available at some point in the order of votes which caters for a wider audience, individual tastes and requirements. The benefits to subscribing are their votes which modules are most popular and worked on first, have the modules as soon as they are developed and subscribers have the input and feedback to develop it, when the module is fully developed, it could go on site for sale to those that don’t want to subscribe? For other developers, or those keen to learn, also use the sites facilities with a potential earn on completion.

Going forward, they could be the option of subscribers (only) developing sound/tutorial packs with patches, for a small fee. Tutorials etc are made available to subscribers adding a further incentive.

thanks for your input, i’ll think about this some more. Mixing voting with subscriptions will be difficult if not impossible. If it has to be a voting mechanism then we should probably stick to the other model.

The first model is essentially a pre-order model, and it feels like a very democratic way to prioritize the work.

The second model would appear to give you (Percussa) more creative freedom, and I know I do my best work when I’m creatively motivated.

So, tough call. Good luck with the decision, I’m excited to see what emerges!

1 Like