A very good essay on working with DAWS

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
Post Reply
User avatar
rvman
Posts: 125
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

http://pinknoisemag.com/essays/wonders-of-pro-tools

Lots of thoughtful information in this article. Are DAWS helping or hurting?
********************************
Reason 8, EZ Drummer 2, Loop Loft loops

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

14 Mar 2015

Interestingly, you could say very similar things comparing the pre-multi track days to the days of endless overdubs, syncing multiple machines to further extend track count, recording musicians separately instead of as a group, extending the production process from days to months or even years, punching in so musicians didn't have to play it right all the way through, and countless more "innovations" that one could also claim have changed the way music is made and recorded. 

There are always pros and cons with progress. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

:)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
rvman
Posts: 125
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

Very true, Selig.

I remember reading an interview with Chet Atkins who spoke of his early days in the recording studio and if you messed up everybody else in the band would be SO ticked. Because you just had to start over and do the whole song again.

And if you messed up one too many times, you would be out of a job.

That's pressure. LOL.
********************************
Reason 8, EZ Drummer 2, Loop Loft loops

kitekrazy
Posts: 1036
Joined: 19 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

 Sounds like a person who can't adapt to new technology.  I do think recordings have become too perfect.  I appreciate live performances even at the lowest skill level these days.  Tempos are not perfect, intonation that exists by instrument design are often present.  Listen to some of the music of the 60's -70's where brass was used.  The drums were also not in your face. 
 Music has to be mass produced these days because it has far more competition for entertainment. I believe music sales are down because there are other forms of digital entertainment to buy.  When a Call of Duty or GTA title is released the sales are in the billions.  That doesn't happen with music. All of the older bands realize the money is not in the studio but out on the road. 

User avatar
pushedbutton
Posts: 1538
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Lancashire, UK
Contact:

14 Mar 2015

DAWs v's Analogue is like electric cars v's petrol.
Electric cars are Faster, more efficient, quieter and more economical.
Petrol cars are more iconic, noisier, have more character and offer the driver more feedback from the road. Where an electric car might come with safety features and traction control, it might be more of a fun ride to be without them. The subtle quirks nuances of analogue systems are usually smoothed over by digital control. As to what's better, that's subjective.
@pushedbutton on twitter, add me, send me a message, but don't try to sell me stuff cos I'm skint.
Using Reason since version 3 and still never finished a song.

User avatar
PSoames
Posts: 278
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Somerset, UK

14 Mar 2015

There are some aspects of this essay I agree with, particularly the issue of semantic satiation. it's too easy to become too close to the music that you somehow become detached; hearing things that aren't there or not hearing things that are.

I also worry about the pursuit of perfection, in both timing and tune. There's nothing wrong with being a little ahead of the beat or a couple of cents off, but we are training ourselves to expect pin point accuracy and there have been times of late when I've listened to a old tune and instead of enjoying as I used too, I'm now noticing inaccuracy and I hate that modern music making devices can do that to beloved classics.

But having said that, I don't for a second believe we should eschew modern technology for old, after all I'm able to use tools and employ techniques I wouldn't have been able to 10, 20 or 30 years ago. We just need to learn to use it with care and consideration.

User avatar
rvman
Posts: 125
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

Maybe the biggest thing I got from it is getting bogged down in editing and unlimited choices. To the point where it wears you out and you end up with unfinished projects.

I've noticed this about myself in the last six months. I have to step away, refocus, make a decision, and finish it. Then just let it go and live with it.

When I was in a band in the 80's we had no choice but to hit the record button and that was it. We couldn't afford to redo over and over. You take the good with the bad.
********************************
Reason 8, EZ Drummer 2, Loop Loft loops

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

14 Mar 2015

The thing is, we can all still work the way they did in the 70's or even the 50s with the modern tools. There's absolutely nothing about a DAW that FORCES you to quantize everything to the grid, record band members separately, tune everything perfectly, etc.

That's the part I have the most trouble with.

:)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
dvdrtldg
Posts: 2386
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

selig wrote:Interestingly, you could say very similar things comparing the pre-multi track days to the days of endless overdubs, syncing multiple machines to further extend track count, recording musicians separately instead of as a group, extending the production process from days to months or even years, punching in so musicians didn't have to play it right all the way through, and countless more "innovations" that one could also claim have changed the way music is made and recorded. 

There are always pros and cons with progress. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

:)
Couldn't agree more.

It's not really surprising that some old-ass producer with a studio full of analog gear prefers the old days, and she's welcome to her opinion. But you could easily reverse the argument in that article and rewrite it with the "cons" dealt with in throwaway paragraphs and the "pros" extensively detailed.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

14 Mar 2015

selig wrote: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

:)
Exactly. Though there are plenty of "broken" things in the computer world, there is nothing wrong with the idea of digital recording. Fact, in the professional world, almost everything you hear is from the digital domain. 

I think she sounded like someone who needs attention on a subject that has been beaten to death. So you got to use a console. Congratulations, the rest of us have mostly moved on.


User avatar
dvdrtldg
Posts: 2386
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

14 Mar 2015

I suspect that lot of this sort of argument boils down to professional gatekeeping. "I paid my dues, invested in thousands of $$$ of gear, spent years working as a studio engineer and painstakingly developed a range of specialist skills. Now, anyone with a bit of cash can set themselves up as a wannabe-producer in their bedroom and spuriously claim to be part of my professional elite. It's not fair".

As Selig said, there's nothing about a DAW that forces you to produce overly slick, santised music. Sure, the evidence is there in the pop industry, where there you *do* hear the sort of homogenising tendencies she's talking about - but even that's not new. The pop industry has always been homogenised, it's just that now it's homogenised in a different way than it was in the past. But there's plenty of music out there, produced digitally, that doesn't fall into the sort of traps described in the article.

Personally I find that one of the great joys of working with digital tools is going against the grain and finding ways to circumvent perfection. I guess you could say there's something perverse in deliberately trying to mimic the effects of imperfection, spontaneity, happy accidents etc. But the result for me is a greater appreciation of precisely the same musical values she feels are under threat.

User avatar
Benedict
Competition Winner
Posts: 2747
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Contact:

15 Mar 2015

I love that digtial lets me work fast. No worrying about technical problems. The DAW has all those things like FSK Sync sorted for me. I can just throw down sounds and notes and start to paint. Also if I want 8 Parsecs I can do that without committing anything to tape that I have to die with later.

The issue is with the craftsman now.

:)
Benedict Roff-Marsh
Completely burned and gone

Flandersh
Posts: 126
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Norway
Contact:

15 Mar 2015

dvdrtldg wrote:I suspect that lot of this sort of argument boils down to professional gatekeeping. "I paid my dues, invested in thousands of $$$ of gear, spent years working as a studio engineer and painstakingly developed a range of specialist skills. Now, anyone with a bit of cash can set themselves up as a wannabe-producer in their bedroom and spuriously claim to be part of my professional elite. It's not fair".
I would agree that in this specific case it may absolutely be the fact, but in general the article seems to point to the concept of counterproductivity and the possibly irrational action of trying to solve a technological problem or challenge with technology; to solve a problem with the same thing which made the problem initially. In any case, the lightest solution to this is to always have in mind the importance of being a master of the tools rather than being a slave to the tools, with a special awareness of automatical tools, like in example compressors, which in itself take some of the control from the users and transform them partly into slaves.

Counterproductivity beside, I think the technological influence on music in itself says something important about the state of music in the modern society and even has a big influence on it. And the digital cons can as well have its foundation in this development.

User avatar
PSoames
Posts: 278
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: Somerset, UK

15 Mar 2015

dvdrtldg wrote:I suspect that lot of this sort of argument boils down to professional gatekeeping. "I paid my dues, invested in thousands of $$$ of gear, spent years working as a studio engineer and painstakingly developed a range of specialist skills. Now, anyone with a bit of cash can set themselves up as a wannabe-producer in their bedroom and spuriously claim to be part of my professional elite. It's not fair".
Flandersh wrote:
I would agree that in this specific case it may absolutely be the fact, but in general the article seems to point to the concept of counterproductivity and the possibly irrational action of trying to solve a technological problem or challenge with technology; to solve a problem with the same thing which made the problem initially. In any case, the lightest solution to this is to always have in mind the importance of being a
Flandersh wrote:master of the tools
Flandersh wrote: rather than being a
Flandersh wrote:slave to the tools
Flandersh wrote:, with a special awareness of automatical tools, like in example compressors, which in itself take some of the control from the users and transform them partly into slaves.

Counterproductivity beside, I think the technological influence on music in itself says something important about the state of music in the modern society and even has a big influence on it. And the digital cons can as well have its foundation in this development.
Yes, we must take care not to over-work the message!

User avatar
virtualpt
Posts: 41
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

15 Mar 2015

selig wrote:The thing is, we can all still work the way they did in the 70's or even the 50s with the modern tools. There's absolutely nothing about a DAW that FORCES you to quantize everything to the grid, record band members separately, tune everything perfectly, etc.

That's the part I have the most trouble with.

:)
Absolutely agree. I very rarely quantise anything nowadays.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

15 Mar 2015

Just a question though, weren't most things quantized back when electronic music came on? Drum machine stuff, bass parts that were a single note repeat from a sequencer, etc? So it's not like people don't like quantized stuff....seems to be more of an "talk about the music forums" thing.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

15 Mar 2015

gak wrote:Just a question though, weren't most things quantized back when electronic music came on? Drum machine stuff, bass parts that were a single note repeat from a sequencer, etc? So it's not like people don't like quantized stuff....seems to be more of an "talk about the music forums" thing.
Indeed - but what I've seen is different. It is that "players" want to be quantized so they're parts "feel" good. I'll be the first to say that many records have some timing corrected (I've done it on countless records myself), but in that case you don't quantize to the grid, you LISTEN and feel what should be adjusted (not necessarily "corrected) and do ONLY what is required to avoid the obvious train wrecks. Of course you can take this process are far as you like, but I tend to work on projects where it's more a feel thing than a grid thing.

:)
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

15 Mar 2015

Sometimes I think it sounds good, sometimes I don't. I like having the option to what what I please :)  

User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

16 Mar 2015

I'm with Selig. It's great to have endless choices but with that choice is also the responsibility to not over do it. To know that just because you have 99 tracks doesn't mean you should use them.
 I actually miss the time it took rewinding to hear a take. Gives a moment of reflexion. Psychologically, mulitiple takes on analog tape seems more expensive-and it is in many ways- and it takes more time thus giving the artist a sense of importance to each take.
Sometimes the limitation of your choices lends itself to some commitment that you don't have to take in a DAW. Having distinct barriors sometimes improve creativity and uniqueness of style/sound. "We only have 2 LA2As so we better cut with them" versus "We have 22 different compressor type plug-ins so we don't have to make a commitment."

KEVMOVE02
Posts: 267
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

18 Mar 2015

To put it succinctly, "a 4 string bass is always a 4 string bass, even when it has 6 strings."

Best practices in an analog studio are still best practices in an analog/digital studio, especially if the only analog gear is you.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests