The DAW-less topic is a new one
I wouldn't say that was
entirely true.
and it causes the legacy guys to scratch their heads and wonder why some guys would go backwards
"OH SHIT ! HERE COME THE LEGACY GUYS ! I'M GETTING OUTTA HERE !"
I don't know who "the legacy guys" are {they sound like the enforcers for a bunch of insane and unscrupulous will and property lawyers !}, but it is true that there has long been a Kabal that questions the choice of those to not follow their computer-housed ways.
My reasonings come mostly from living in a "musical winter"
OK, I'll bite.
What does that mean ? Why am I reminded of the White Witch, Aslan and Narnia ?
Basically, new music sucks and needs a new place and approach to get the gold
I disagree and I agree. I don't think "new music sucks" because I don't even listen to 98% of "new music." What
is "new music" ? Is it new product by artists that have been around for 30, 40, 50, or 60 years ? Is it stuff by people one has never heard of ? Is it stuff by artists and bands that have never released music into the public domain before ?
Can it ever be fair, let alone in any way sensible, to ever classify "new music" with all its disparate artists, genres, styles and scope, much less to say it "all" sucks ?
But I do agree that finding new {in reality, that should read: "different"} approaches for specific individuals can usually be a healthy thing ~ if that is what they feel needs to be done and that is what they choose.
This might include "going backwards" as you put it. But that doesn't intrinsically guarantee the creation of music any fresher or more original than what has already been. Neither does it mean that the methods one turns one's back on could not bring about the desired results.
Yes, computers are very efficient and loaded with options but can be expensive
I'd say that now, there are computers for just about every price point in existence. You want one for £100 ? Great. You want a £2000 model ? Stump up the cash, pal.
most guys will fall down into the lonely one-man-band category that makes for a project that may be dull due to all ideas coming from one person
Of all the things said in this thread, nothing grabbed me by the short and curlies more than this.
Is this true ? Bear in mind, you've said "most" guys.
Taking it in its constituent parts, it is not untrue that many home recorders will find that they are in the "one person band" category. But why should that be a pejorative ? And is it wise to dismiss the reasons why many may end up as sole operators ?
It didn't prevent Paul McCartney coming up with a good album when he provided all the input into his first solo album. It didn't stop Stevie Wonder hitting paydirt with "Innervisions" where there are songs where he's the only participant. And before anyone says "but they're more talented etc" that's neither true nor relevant to the point which is about lone operators. There have been so many artists that have done the work on their own. And I'm talking about the days before there ever was such a thing as a DAW or digital recording.
There is also that feeling like Im not closely connected to the sound because everything is behind a screen
If you feel that, then that's on you. The reality is that every recording machine that multitracks, whether analog, digital, DAW, console or whatever has a visual element, be it waveforms, level bars or simply vu meters. I would say that to be well-rounded, one should be acquainted with whatever they need to be visually while always making sure that one's ears {or ear} have the pre-eminence.
The music is always somewhere
other.
Anyone ever try to use those gloves in an incubator to codle a preemie baby? Yeah, thats what it feels like
If that was me, I'd simply tune my head to the reality of the situation and coddle the baby and emit my love to it rather than worry about the fact that I'm having to wear these weird gloves.
Theres obviously many other reasons for going DAW-less.
I never have a problem with a person's reasons for going DAWless or anything else, after all, they've arrived at that point for their own reasons. But I do carefully examine the reasons and so often, they fall into that realm where in order to conclude A, B must be shown to be the bad guy. And that's when I might get a little shirty.
There's a feeling one gets when going against consumerism
Thing is, one can be part of the consumerist, capitalist system every single day, be buying things, and still go against consumerism. Not making music on a DAW doesn't seem to fall into that category. Not buying stuff you don't
use, just for the sake of buying it because you
can,
that's going against consumerism.
We live in an era in the music industry that is FULL OF STUFF. AND MORE STUFF. AND MORE STUFF
When wasn't it like that ? Just go back to trade papers and magazines from the 1950s, 60, 70s and 80s. 'Twas ever thus. I've just finished reading a copy of this free mag that I used to get in the late 80s {very late !} and up to about 1998, called Making Music. It came out monthly and the one I've just read is the November 1989 issue. That was actually the first one I ever read back then. I remember it, it had a great interview with Jack Bruce, the bassist. Anyway, it is stuffed to the gills with "stuff, more stuff and even more stuff than that." Keyboards, sequencers, guitars, basses, amps, effects, drums, drum sticks, guitar strings, drummer gloves, drum machines, new-fangled stuff, old, vintage stuff, upgrades of existing stuff, new inventions, invites to trade fairs enticing with even more stuff.....
The whole "come and buy this stuff and tomorrow buy even more stuff because the stuff you bought yesterday will be old and naff and passé" is a fact of life and has been for......well, longer than you and I. It used to be in the category of "Keeping up with the Joneses."
It's hard to justify buying a brand new interface when you can buy used gear on eBay that the pros of old used
Is it ?
What if you just don't want to own something that had someone else's grubby paws on it ? I might not want to own the recording console that Steve Marriott owned in his home studio when I see in multiple books and interviews that his dog

used to shit

all over his house and he didn't clean it up !


But jokes aside, I don't get the logic. Just because old pros used something, why should you not buy a new interface
if that's what you need at that moment ?
And what guarantee have you got that the older equipment you buy is going to be running brilliantly for the next 15 or 20 years ? The pro may have run it into the ground and left just enough life in it for it to be sold and last a year.
OK, OK, that
was cynical !
Im a former electronics tech and I can fix and service them
Which is a great place to be. I would guess that a huge slice of those thinking of going DAW-less aren't techy, but romantic.
I can get......a tape for 8.00 and I have all I need with 8 tracks
You'll know this without me saying it, but I'll say it anyway ~ be sure to buy up loads of tape, more than you'll ever need, just in case. I have a CD recorder that I bought in '98 and I still use it. But it's so temperamental, there are only 2 brands of CDRW that it will play, Maxells {and even with them, you have to wrestle and perform some jiggery-pokery to get them to record} and Traxdatas. I managed, after much searching, to source a guy in Singapore that still sells the old Traxdatas. I bought 40, which, because they're re-recordable, should see me clear for the next 20 years. I use them to test out my recordings on anything I use with a CD player and transfer them to various storage and then I wipe and re-use. 3 years in, I'm still on disc number one.
Used audio gear can be a real bargain especially in hard times
I have my fair share of used gear and I'd never knock them. I love 'em. But they can be a mixed blessing too. Sometimes they don't work ! Well, after a little while. Usually when the 3-month guarantee has expired !
Grim, I think you know that's never going to happen!
Ne dis jamais, jamais {never say 'never'}.
The 24 is great but expensive for now. Plus, its more of a portastudio
Well, that's what I was thinking the very first time I saw it.
You mention the fact that it's a Portastudio as if that's a detractor somehow
For me, the portastudio format is the Queen of the forest and the King of the hill.