What's More Important To You? The DAW, The Computer Or The Composer?

[THE INTRANCER]

I thought this would be an interesting question on which to judge this community on.

[FranklyFlawless]

None of those options.

[BONES]

Same here, none of those things are really that important to me, in and of themselves. They are all just part of the process but the only thing that matters to me is the song you have at the end of that process.

To quantify each a little, we made and remade our 5th album in two different DAWs and some of the songs sounded better from one, others from the other. But the differences were small and inconsequential, we could have released either version and been equally happy. As it was, we picked some songs from each session but nobody would be able to pick which was made where, so DAWs aren't important.

I've worked on five different computers over the past couple of years but it has made completely and utterly no difference to anything.

Finally, I write some of our songs and my bandmate writes the rest but I'd be very surprised if anyone could pick which were whose. We also do a few covers and they sit in perfectly with our own stuff.

The thing is, I could complain that without Orion, we don't have the inimitable sound of Wasp and Orion's workflow is much better than any other DAW. Or I could complain about how much time and effort I've put into switching computers so regularly and all the hassles that's created. I could also explain how much better our process works when my bandmate provides the basis for a song but, the thing is, none of that matters when it comes to the reason I do all of it, which is to have songs to perform on stage. The songs we end up with are of a very consistent quality which often exceeds my expectations and none of that has anything to do with what computer we use, which DAW we work in or which of us writes the songs.

So what does make a difference? f**ked if I know, although I think that the general improvements in the quality of the tools at our disposal over the years has definitely allowed us to get closer to what we set out to achieve all those years ago. e.g. Last month I resurrected a couple of old songs, one we probably haven't performed for more than 20 years. When they appeared on our early albums, those songs sounded good but the biggest sounding Unison synth we had back then was JX Synth, which is pathetic by current standards. So the simple act of replacing JX Synth with Union and putting in some better sounding drums lifted that song to an entirely new level. I didn't have to change the arrangement or do much else and an old, forgotten song is suddenly one we can't wait to get up and play.

In the end, then, I suppose you could say that what computer I use doesn't matter, as long s it's a fairly new, powerful one. Which DAW I use doesn't matter, as long as it's a recent version and who writes a song doesn't matter once we've put it through our process.

[jamcat]

Obviously, no matter how you look at the question, the answer is: the composer.

If it's someone else's music I'm listening to, I don't care what DAW or computer they used. Almost certainly, they recorded through a console to tape in a time before DAWs. I'm listening because I want to listen to that band play those songs. I'm listening because I want to hear Adele, not a Dell. I'm listening to Cake, not Cakewalk. I'm listening to Grim Reaper, not REAPER. I'm listening to Fleetwood Mac, not Apple Mac. I'm listening to Live, not Live. OK, I think I've exhausted the puns now...

If it's my own music we're talking about, then of course I am the one indispensable part. Studio One just sits here on my Mac doing nothing if I'm not filling it with my music.

If it's a philosophical question of which of the three really matters most for the creative process, again, it's going to be the composer. Sibelius wouldn't have been any better with a computer, even if he used Sibelius.

[BBFG#]

The relationship.

[enroe]

Of course the composer is very important. He brings in the ideas, melody, rhythm and all that.
The DAW and the computer are just the tools, like pliers and hammers are to a craftsman.

[VELLTONE MUSIC]

The good one,the bad one or the ugly mf...hihihi
The Soo-ound Designer is my answer :):)

[seafire]

I thought this would be an interesting question on which to judge this community on.

It isn't

[VariKusBrainZ]

But it is, hes not looking for you to complete the survey but to reply with your opinion

[chk071]

The face palms.

[BONES]

I want to hear Adele, not a Dell.

Does Adele write her own songs? I know she does the lyrics but I think she gets other people to write the tunes, doesn't she? I'd suggest her success has far more to do with her voice than her skills as a composer.

Sibelius wouldn't have been any better with a computer, even if he used Sibelius.

OTOH, I couldn't do any damned thing without some form of DAW, whether it's a hardware sequencer or something ITB.

[gentleclockdivider]

The foreplay

[whyterabbyt]

I thought this would be an interesting question on which to judge this community on.

How? The question is flawed.

[vurt]

as i am the composer in my trilogy, then me.
i don't need to medicate my computer.


also, the computer is part of the daw, i think you mean "host".
host + computer = daw.

[musicartist99]

The composer, because he can use different computers or DAWs

Actually a composer can dispose of both DAW and computer and compose with only real instruments