(12-04-2020, 10:45 PM)lconway Wrote: I did awake to a notification of the change. I had feared they would use our good will donations to build a platform they could then bill us for, and they did not disappoint.
Since the pricing includes the max number of players I could argue that that number of players should be included in the price. So one band member buys a $4.95 plan and up to 6 people can be invited into the session hosted by the owner. I am sure that is not their intent, but words have meaning.
I am also concerned abut how much the throttled bandwidth is going to impact connectivity and quality. I like JK and am not prepared to pull the plug just yet. BUT, it is not stable enough - still issues - even with max available bandwidth up until now - to continue paying for very long.
I am going to address the 6 subscribers needed versus 1 subscriber issue with support.
Team JamKazam needs to be careful that they don't kill the horse that got them this far... I believe it's the audio stream bitrate that is being affected by tier which would affect quality and not latency I'm thinking
12-04-2020, 11:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-04-2020, 11:14 PM by Jonasg.)
(10-25-2020, 09:53 PM)Yoon Lee Wrote: Hi, everyone.
I just tried opening Jamkazam on my mobile device and found the updated jamkazam webpage showing planned monthly pricing for a number of subscription tiers.
https://jamkazam.com/remote-music-rehearsals/
Free versions would be limited to 4hrs/month, with each session being limited to 1hr/month, and three paid tiers being offered.
I understand that Jamkazam now has a sizable community of users and assume that there are cost involved in hosting servers, maintenance and development etc. So Jamkazam finding a sustainable way of growth is something I've been looking forward to, and I believe this wish is shared among many.
My question is rather, if the existing members had received any newsletters or announcement regarding this change, ESPECIALLY the volunteers and the donors who is helping Jamkazam reach their fundraising goal and more. (no-strings-attached, goodwill donations as far as what I can see)
Seeing the updated page on the plans and pricing without having received any announcement or newsletter, should come as a lack of transparency and consistency to the donors and volunteers, if not all users who are helping to improve Jamkazam by effectively beta testing it as they use it, and actively sending crash reports etc.
If I may point out as an example, the 'Most Popular' highlight on the middle tier paid subscription plan on their website - I assume this is a common marketing practice yet is a false statement, as nobody on Jamkazam so far could've been a paid subscriber as the plans are listed as 'coming soon' at the time of this posting. Therefore there cannot be any data on which plan is the most popular.
- Fellow users, have you received any announcement or newsletter regarding the coming paid subscription plans?
- And to the Jamkazam operators, would you share/comment on my concerns regarding the lack of communication on your planned change into a paid subscription service, especially for those who has been volunteers and donors?
- And again, the community of people who make Jamkazam such a lively and noisy place - what are your thoughts?
Thanks and greetings to everyone,
- Yoon
I got an email from JamKazam today 12/4/2020 stating that the pay plan will begin in January 2021
(12-04-2020, 11:05 PM)StuartR Wrote: (12-04-2020, 10:45 PM)lconway Wrote: I did awake to a notification of the change. I had feared they would use our good will donations to build a platform they could then bill us for, and they did not disappoint.
Since the pricing includes the max number of players I could argue that that number of players should be included in the price. So one band member buys a $4.95 plan and up to 6 people can be invited into the session hosted by the owner. I am sure that is not their intent, but words have meaning.
I am also concerned abut how much the throttled bandwidth is going to impact connectivity and quality. I like JK and am not prepared to pull the plug just yet. BUT, it is not stable enough - still issues - even with max available bandwidth up until now - to continue paying for very long.
I am going to address the 6 subscribers needed versus 1 subscriber issue with support.
Team JamKazam needs to be careful that they don't kill the horse that got them this far... I believe it's the audio stream bitrate that is being affected by tier which would affect quality and not latency I'm thinking Stuart, I understand, but I am wondering HOW MUCH the lower tiers will impact quality. Since we are all currently "Platinum" level, we will not see the impact until we sign-up.
I have to say I am a bit disappointed by the short lead time. Many on here have contributed far more to the GoFundMe than I, and more expertise and sweat equity in developing this. I think you should receive more in return. Just my opinion.
Larry
Bassman9952@gmail.com
(12-05-2020, 02:09 AM)lconway Wrote: (12-04-2020, 11:05 PM)StuartR Wrote: (12-04-2020, 10:45 PM)lconway Wrote: I did awake to a notification of the change. I had feared they would use our good will donations to build a platform they could then bill us for, and they did not disappoint.
Since the pricing includes the max number of players I could argue that that number of players should be included in the price. So one band member buys a $4.95 plan and up to 6 people can be invited into the session hosted by the owner. I am sure that is not their intent, but words have meaning.
I am also concerned abut how much the throttled bandwidth is going to impact connectivity and quality. I like JK and am not prepared to pull the plug just yet. BUT, it is not stable enough - still issues - even with max available bandwidth up until now - to continue paying for very long.
I am going to address the 6 subscribers needed versus 1 subscriber issue with support.
Team JamKazam needs to be careful that they don't kill the horse that got them this far... I believe it's the audio stream bitrate that is being affected by tier which would affect quality and not latency I'm thinking Stuart, I understand, but I am wondering HOW MUCH the lower tiers will impact quality. Since we are all currently "Platinum" level, we will not see the impact until we sign-up.
I have to say I am a bit disappointed by the short lead time. Many on here have contributed far more to the GoFundMe than I, and more expertise and sweat equity in developing this. I think you should receive more in return. Just my opinion. Quoting from the JK email earlier today:
"If you contributed $50 or more to our GoFundMe and feel like you should not have to pay monthly subscription fees so close to the time you made this contribution, then please drop us a note at support@jamkazam.com, and please include your name, email address, the amount, and the approximate date you made your contribution. We will talk with you and do our best to work something out that feels fair to you."
I believe mp3 quality is usually between 128 and 192 kbps. CD quality is around 1,400 kbps. Spotify paid version varies from 24 to 320 kbps Our choices in Jamkazam are from 128 to 512, which will now be determined by your subscription plan.
Spotify Premium
Low: Equivalent to approximately 24kbit/s
Normal: Equivalent to approximately 96kbit/s
High: Equivalent to approximately 160kbit/s
Very high: Equivalent to approximately 320kbit/s
Using Line 6 Helix or Roland Session Mixer as audio interface
HI Everyone
I am part of chorus of about 20 members that have been using JK for about half a year now. We moved to JK because we could not safely sing together in the covid pandemic situation.
JK has enabled us to sing together safely, in groups of 10 people at a time, which really would be impossible without it at this time. BUT... it has been a very trying experience. Most of the chorus members are not tech savvy at all. So a few of the more tech savvy people have volunteered to help with installations and trouble shooting for everyone.
There has been A LOT of technical problems pretty much the whole time over the last 6 months. People not being able to get their audio drivers to work, people not being able to join sessions, Audio not coming through for sporadically, clients cra$ng, having to restart the PC, etc...
If we were not desperate to keep singing in these crazy times we would not have kept trying to use JK. I can't remember using any other software with as many technical problems as JK.
When things work well, people are pretty happy with the experience: good client features, ease of use, good audio quality, ability to collaborate live. These are great if they work well.
But when you have to restart your PC 2 times during a 1 hour session, or just cannot participate for no apparent reason except for some obscure failure message with no apparent solution, it becomes an extremely frustrating experience.
We have had people quit part-taking in our JK sessions even when it was free. I am pretty sure, that most people will quit if they have to pay the $10/month fee (that you might normally charge for a really well working service like Netflix or Zoom), for what is still a very unstable software which is frustrating and challenging to use. Even promise of 1:1 support is not going to make people happy that pretty much expect a seamless experience for something they pay good money to use.
So, I think JK has a lot of promise, but it has not reached the level of maturity where people would be willing to pay typical service subscription fees.
I might also keep in mind, that the people who have been using JK so far, have been serving as a volunteer test bench which I hope has helped identify the software problems that have appeared nearly constantly. Yes, they have been using it for free, but normally you would have a Q&A department do such work.
I think it is too early to start to ask people to pay. Once JK becomes stable and people see that the value it brings greatly outweighs the level of frustration they have to put up with by using it, I think you can slowly start charging money for it without risking people giving up on it.
I may sound negative, but I really want the JK to succeed moving forward.
Thanks, Hans
(12-05-2020, 07:06 PM)hwalman Wrote: HI Everyone
I am part of chorus of about 20 members that have been using JK for about half a year now. We moved to JK because we could not safely sing together in the covid pandemic situation.
JK has enabled us to sing together safely, in groups of 10 people at a time, which really would be impossible without it at this time. BUT... it has been a very trying experience. Most of the chorus members are not tech savvy at all. So a few of the more tech savvy people have volunteered to help with installations and trouble shooting for everyone.
There has been A LOT of technical problems pretty much the whole time over the last 6 months. People not being able to get their audio drivers to work, people not being able to join sessions, Audio not coming through for sporadically, clients cra$ng, having to restart the PC, etc...
If we were not desperate to keep singing in these crazy times we would not have kept trying to use JK. I can't remember using any other software with as many technical problems as JK.
When things work well, people are pretty happy with the experience: good client features, ease of use, good audio quality, ability to collaborate live. These are great if they work well.
But when you have to restart your PC 2 times during a 1 hour session, or just cannot participate for no apparent reason except for some obscure failure message with no apparent solution, it becomes an extremely frustrating experience.
We have had people quit part-taking in our JK sessions even when it was free. I am pretty sure, that most people will quit if they have to pay the $10/month fee (that you might normally charge for a really well working service like Netflix or Zoom), for what is still a very unstable software which is frustrating and challenging to use. Even promise of 1:1 support is not going to make people happy that pretty much expect a seamless experience for something they pay good money to use.
So, I think JK has a lot of promise, but it has not reached the level of maturity where people would be willing to pay typical service subscription fees.
I might also keep in mind, that the people who have been using JK so far, have been serving as a volunteer test bench which I hope has helped identify the software problems that have appeared nearly constantly. Yes, they have been using it for free, but normally you would have a Q&A department do such work.
I think it is too early to start to ask people to pay. Once JK becomes stable and people see that the value it brings greatly outweighs the level of frustration they have to put up with by using it, I think you can slowly start charging money for it without risking people giving up on it.
I may sound negative, but I really want the JK to succeed moving forward.
Thanks, Hans Hans,
You raise some valid points. Please cut and paste this message into your email and send it to:
support@Jamkazam.com
Don't assume they'll necessarily see it here.
I will not pay anything until the JamKazam development team figures out how to overcome the speed of light 
Echoing similar sentiments -
I received an email about the new model. I understand that development and server hosting costs are expensive, but I kind of wish that they could give more than 4 hours of play time for the free service. There ARE still free alternatives, like Jamulus, so they need to step up their game to not lose users to those platforms.
Also would be nice if you could get a yearly member$p discount. I didn't see that mentioned in the email at least.
Frankly, I can afford to pay. A large part of the value of JamKazam is its amazing musical community. I'll be sorry to lose the ability to play with some awesome real musicians whose livelihoods are in danger and who can't work during the pandemic nor afford a luxury like JamKazam. Similar to mobile apps, maybe they could somehow have a free model with ads, in spite of the fact that I realize how repulsive that could be depending on how it's done. Thinking that there are probably not enough users to get good ad revenue, but I would think that Guitar Center, Sweetwater, etc might be interested in ads.
12-06-2020, 12:31 AM
(10-25-2020, 09:53 PM)Yoon Lee Wrote: Hi, everyone.
I just tried opening Jamkazam on my mobile device and found the updated jamkazam webpage showing planned monthly pricing for a number of subscription tiers.
https://jamkazam.com/remote-music-rehearsals/
Free versions would be limited to 4hrs/month, with each session being limited to 1hr/month, and three paid tiers being offered.
I re
I understand that Jamkazam now has a sizable community of users and assume that there are cost involved in hosting servers, maintenance and development etc. So Jamkazam finding a sustainable way of growth is something I've been looking forward to, and I believe this wish is shared among many.
My question is rather, if the existing members had received any newsletters or announcement regarding this change, ESPECIALLY the volunteers and the donors who is helping Jamkazam reach their fundraising goal and more. (no-strings-attached, goodwill donations as far as what I can see)
Seeing the updated page on the plans and pricing without having received any announcement or newsletter, should come as a lack of transparency and consistency to the donors and volunteers, if not all users who are helping to improve Jamkazam by effectively beta testing it as they use it, and actively sending crash reports etc.
If I may point out as an example, the 'Most Popular' highlight on the middle tier paid subscription plan on their website - I assume this is a common marketing practice yet is a false statement, as nobody on Jamkazam so far could've been a paid subscriber as the plans are listed as 'coming soon' at the time of this posting. Therefore there cannot be any data on which plan is the most popular.
- Fellow users, have you received any announcement or newsletter regarding the coming paid subscription plans?
- And to the Jamkazam operators, would you share/comment on my concerns regarding the lack of communication on your planned change into a paid subscription service, especially for those who has been volunteers and donors?
- And again, the community of people who make Jamkazam such a lively and noisy place - what are your thoughts?
Thanks and greetings to everyone,
- Yoon I received an announcement through my email regarding the upcoming paid subscriptions on December 3, 2020. It explained everything in detail, to include the users who donated to the effort. I understand the need for paid subscriptions as the cost of full time software engineers is not cheap. From their statement they made approximately $100,000 in donations which is around the average yearly salary of one engineer. The problem is, one engineer will not be enough to sustain the massive updates they claim to have made, and going forward in the future. I say "claim" because I have not began testing the updates to measure their success. We only have thought December to do so. Beginning January 1 is when a paid subscription will be required. Until then, any existing users have access to the highest package tier.
Regarding those who donated, they mentioned that if anyone who donated over $50 can email them and maybe work out a deal which would be fair. I donated because this could be a very handy tool regarding remote practice with my small band. And if it is worth the money, I will likely be a subscriber.
My worry for this business model is their success depends on subscriptions. What happens if there are not enough subscriptions to fund the application moving forward? Definitely in these times, many musicians are looking for ways to jam with each other remotely. Hopefully some money will be spent on marketing. The biggest pole in the tent is if the app doesn't satisfy the users, the subscriptions will not be there. Hopefully this will take off.
(12-06-2020, 12:31 AM)creynbud Wrote: Regarding those who donated, they mentioned that if anyone who donated over $50 can email them and maybe work out a deal which would be fair. I donated because this could be a very handy tool regarding remote practice with my small band. And if it is worth the money, I will likely be a subscriber.
My worry for this business model is their success depends on subscriptions. What happens if there are not enough subscriptions to fund the application moving forward? Definitely in these times, many musicians are looking for ways to jam with each other remotely. Hopefully some money will be spent on marketing. The biggest pole in the tent is if the app doesn't satisfy the users, the subscriptions will not be there. Hopefully this will take off. Well, here's the thing. If this continues to be free, it won't improve and it won't be sustainable. Whatever subscribers they get (and I'm thinking that a lot of us who have been pretty much daily users since March will subscribe) will be more than they had before and it's likely to take off. I've been pretty impressed with the impovements so far: my musical partner and I can now play pretty much at full speed without gettting out of sync. And although we still have to use the "resync" button regularly, crashes aren't usually a big problem. Yeah, they happen, but they're not frequent and it's easy to restart.
So here's hoping enough subscribe to give a couple of engineers a full-time job!
Cindy Harris
Pittsburgh, PA
|
