# Has the DAW had a positive or negative effect on composition?



## Alastair (Nov 8, 2014)

Hi guys, some of you may remember me posting a similar type of question on here at around this time last year. I'm now in my third year at Uni, and I thought I'd build upon the research project I did last year with a more focused question for my dissertation. I should add that the responses I got last year were incredible, and they gave me so much to think about and expand upon in the actual essay - for which I got a first 

The current working title thusfar is as follows:

*"Has the DAW had a positive or negative affect on the composition of modern film music, and moreover the musical ability of composers in general?"*

As with the research last year, I'd be using any responses as primary research quotes in the essay. I will only ask for answers around the actual topic title this time rather than individual points, so give me your honest opinions on what you think on either side of the argument.

I should add that if anyone's interested I'll post up the finished version of last year's essay, if I can find it on my old hard drive!

Thanks in advance,

Alastair.


----------



## wst3 (Nov 8, 2014)

For me the answer is a solid "yes".

When I was a wee lad I fantasized about being able to hear my compositions without torturing the students at the local music college. Not every one of my compositions is as brilliant as I'd like, and being able to mock them up with samples helps me find my bigger blunders.

On the other hand, I think I worked faster when I had only pen and paper. Without the need to worry about production I could focus entirely on composition and arranging. And somehow that seemed to let me finish more work in less time - given that finished was not necessarily audible. 

And I think I worked harder - which is also both good and bad.

I think more folks can create music, which is good.

And I think more filks can create music, which is not always good.

Like any advance in technology, it's a mixed bag until we fully learn how to take advantage of it - by which time we'll have yet another technological advance<G>!


----------



## reddognoyz (Nov 8, 2014)

For me the biggest danger working in my daw is falling into the trap of only writing things I can play in real time. I caught myself doing that this friday. I was doubling a violin line and found myself fixing/quantizing/copypasting it into the other sections.

I should have slowed it down to a tempo at which I could play with feeling and dynamic easily and did natural doubles rather than copy paste.


----------



## bbunker (Nov 8, 2014)

I actually had a recommendation to make that's more for your references and 'thinking about' how you address this issue.

Here's an article you might read: http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/paper_fisher_rock_recording.pdf (http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/pape ... ording.pdf). In it, Fisher kind of sums up some recent writings - dealing with how the development of recording media began to give the position of _auteur_ to the producer, or producer-composer, and also made the record the document with _primary status_ in looking at rock works. Some of the articles he pulls notes from are in JSTOR, if your uni has access.

The reason I bring it up is that what I think is most interesting about the DAW is that it's an extension of this process. Film music seems to be in a unique situation at the moment, since the ontological process isn't complete yet; there are scores written, and composers who work in an ontological frame which posits the 'score' as the primary, whereas others work within a 'record' frame, and the vast majority work within an ambiguous world between those two ontological worlds.

I'd wonder if there was a correlation between a composer's ontological 'situation' and their response to your original question. For example, wst3's great response marks both his shifts in ontology and working preferences!

Just a thought. Feel free to totally ignore me.


----------



## RiffWraith (Nov 8, 2014)

_Has the DAW had a positive or negative effect on composition?_

Both.

Positive: Composing has been made easier with computer technology, taking away the need to write by hand.

Negative: Composing has been made easier with computer technology, taking away the need to write by hand.

Cheers.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Nov 8, 2014)

I, along with a fair number of others here I suspect, could not compose without DAWs (and thus I'm probably unqualified to even comment on this). The barrier to composition entry used to be very high. I thoroughly recommend people watch this old BBC documentary on JW scoring Empire Strikes Back, following him from the Steenback, to his piano, to the scoring stage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGsbKZnaT8E . The skill involved is almost incomprehensible to me, I feel about 1cm tall when I watch it. No videos of picture, just blank staves, a pencil and a piano, producing rich, vibrant, frame-accurate music.

It's patently obvious that less technical skill is required to score now. This is something that many lament, and I can understand why. Orchestral scores used to be richer, in terms of the detail and (often) melody. From one perspective, that means it's case closed - DAWs (and their attendant tech) has had a negative effect. You can make an impressive sound with practically no skill whatsoever.

But there are other perspectives ("incorrect ones", some here will cry). While concert music has tended towards difficult / atonal / experimental, new composers outside formal music training might embrace a more populist style that actually gains a wider audience. Or indeed they might be experimental in more original ways, thinking totally outside the box as it were. In terms of film and media, gifted DAW-based storytellers might bring something special or new to the table.

The formal language of music - the method of communication between a composer and the artist(s) who play it - has historically been the only way to produce serious music at all, at least til the 50s or so. OK, there would have been folk music of various kinds, but jazz, rock and roll etc brought in a whole new way of making different kinds of music which typically didn't rely on any written music. And now written language is optional even for orchestral music (albeit not performed by real musicians), and the DAW has played the biggest part in that.

Personally I think it's very exciting that there is now a broader range of people who are composers, drawing on wider influences perhaps. But that's not to say that I don't also see that the talent and skill nurtured by masters of the art isn't something special and it would be tragic if it were ever completely lost.


----------



## AC986 (Nov 8, 2014)

If it's about film music then it is neither negative or positive because to understand that you have to understand history and people and the world at any given snapshot in time.

If it's about popular music then it's a complete disaster.


----------



## asherpope (Nov 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> I thoroughly recommend people watch this old BBC documentary on JW scoring Empire Strikes Back, following him from the Steenback, to his piano, to the scoring stage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGsbKZnaT8E . The skill involved is almost incomprehensible to me, I feel about 1cm tall when I watch it. No videos of picture, just blank staves, a pencil and a piano, producing rich, vibrant, frame-accurate music.
> 
> .



Now I'm caught in a trap - watching as many John Williams clips as possible! o[])


----------



## Arbee (Nov 8, 2014)

I've had two episodes of music in my life, one pre-DAW and one post-DAW, separated by a long sabbatical. The way it looks to me is:

Pre-DAW - write only on paper and/or at the piano or guitar (though admittedly a few good synths towards the end), some access to experimentation in a studio but VERY limited and VERY expensive. No way could I afford a reasonable home studio. As a result, and while training the inner ear was a necessary plus, I still probably erred on the side of playing it safe re composition, orchestration and innovation.

Post-DAW - write on paper, at the piano/guitar, or in my DAW using a few cool patches for inspiration, even use the whole rig for improvised productions, and all so very economical. As a result, boundless experimentation is possible and blending of sound design with traditional composition and orchestration techniques in one big melting pot.

Do I pine for the "good old days"? Um, er, no way, this is paradise! The risk however is lazyness, too easy to neglect the hard work on the underlying musical architecture while having a good time. The only other thing I miss is hearing real orchestras play my work this time around (so far anyway), that is where the "goose bumps" get a real workout!

.


----------



## germancomponist (Nov 8, 2014)

With one word: Yes!


----------



## Daryl (Nov 9, 2014)

I think that the answer is both yes and no. Certainly there have been fantastic things written with a DAW that pretty much wouldn't have been possible without, but there has also been a huge load of cr*p written that would never have seen the light of day previously, and I, for one, would have been thankful for that.

D


----------



## Stephen Rees (Nov 9, 2014)

I think JW makes nearly everyone feel about 1 cm tall 

Not because of his personality of course, he comes across as very warm and humble, but because of his gifts. I can't imagine what creating music must be like for the kind of person with those abilities.

On a similar note, I read it is quite difficult to determine the actual composition dates of Shostokovich works because he largely completed the compositions in his head before writing them out. Again, mind bogglingly beyond my abilities.

Has the DAW had a positive or negative effect on composition is the question of the thread though. How to answer that? I think Guy's post is one I would sign up to. I too wouldn't be able to create music without it. So on a personal level, it has certainly had a positive effect on me.

I think it has 'democratised' music creation, in the sense that it has allowed far more people into the creative world of music making than would otherwise be the case. Believing that music has real importance as a means of communication, I think that can only be a good thing.


----------



## chibear (Nov 9, 2014)

Daryl @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> I think that the answer is both yes and no. Certainly there have been fantastic things written with a DAW that pretty much wouldn't have been possible without, but there has also been a huge load of cr*p written that would never have seen the light of day previously, and I, for one, would have been thankful for that.D



That pretty much says it all.

As of today, if it wasn't for DAWs I wouldn't be writing. I'd be playing cards or shuffleboard and letting my mind rot. On the flip side, I've heard 'orchestral' music that belongs more in a garage band (not the DAW) than on the airwaves. SO IMO the introduction of DAWs scores high for creativity and low for the effect on general product quality.


----------



## AC986 (Nov 9, 2014)

chibear @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> I'd be playing cards or shuffleboard and letting my mind rot. .



I really _must_ teach you how to play the keyboard. :D


----------



## JacquesMathias (Nov 9, 2014)

I have been living in both worlds.

Working as an arranger, I will always write on paper, or directly in Sibelius. I have been working with a couple of producers who trust my instincts, so I’ll only delivery the parts. No pre-midi mockup. 
They’re great experiences where music ideas seem to flow better, there are no boundaries. No samples limitations. So, DAWs won’t help me or even influence me here. When using Sibelius I don’t ‘play’ to check things. I would rather do on Piano, just like old times.

On the other hand, projects where I’m supposed to mockup all the instruments are definitely unpleasant, because I am struggling with the lack of emotion, sentiment, “warmth” that a real performance is capable to incite. Struggling with that, hundreds of times, will expand your ability to feel things. You’re out of your comfort zone, because you’re the generator of emotion, and, no matter how good your libraries are, you’re desperately trying to make your music alive. 

Conclusion: DAWs and the ability to mockup has definitely had an awesome impact on my musical imagination. I am a better arranger/composer after spending one decade dealing with them. They will make you feel like an idiot/untalented one, most of time. These are import ant lessons. You’re pushing forward. I just think both worlds complement each other. 

— JM


----------



## rgames (Nov 9, 2014)

Alastair @ Sat Nov 08 said:


> The current working title thusfar is as follows:
> 
> *"Has the DAW had a positive or negative affect on the composition of modern film music, and moreover the musical ability of composers in general?"*


As a former academic I have to say that the way you're framing the question is not conducive to a good academic study.

You should ask "What effect has the DAW had on the composition of modern film music?"

The question you have asked cannot be answered because it will invariably lead to answers based on personal preference devoid of any underlying truth, much like asking if the Internet has had a positive or negative effect on conservative and liberal ideologies. Also, again as a former academic, I hope you're using answers from this forum as a very small part of a larger body of research - academics don't reference Internet forums.

rgames


----------



## rJames (Nov 9, 2014)

To follow Richard's lead, I think you are asking the wrong question.

As a dreamer and doltish philosopher wanna-be I think the question should be:

Will this new technology lead to the destruction of humanity or will is give us cheap efficient energy far into the future?


----------



## KEnK (Nov 9, 2014)

Personally I think all recording technology has had a disastrous impact on music.
This is a rather extreme perspective, I'll admit, but it is the recording of music
that has ultimately removed the musician from from the listening experience.

Now when you want to hear music, you just push a button.
No need to engage in the humanness of what created it.

As to film music and the DAW-
This has led to an unprecedented level of homogeneity.
To a large degree, this is the fault of bean counters,
but in fact, the film industry has always been about profits-
During the pre-DAW era there was much more variety and personal vision in film music.

The nature of the quick edit, has meant that films are edited far closer to release dates.
Meaning the composition process suffers.
Due to time constraints, loops, repetition, synth pads and formulaic writing prevail. 

There have even been a couple of threads on this very composition forum
discussing the relevance or necessity of musical literacy and melody.

While I personally enjoy having the practical equivalent of a million dollar studio
on my desk, and can enjoy reasonable facsimiles of virtual any instrument,
the trade off has not been worth the marginalization of the musician 
or the stifling of creative movement.

Disastrous


----------



## rJames (Nov 9, 2014)

Huh?

Push a button or wait a year till your favorite artist comes to a venue within a hundred miles of your home.

Last time I tried to fit an orchestra or heavy metal band in my car, we broke two of the windows and I got a stain in the backseat that is still there to this day. Heck we could hardly fit Steely Dan in the car until they got rid of Michael McDonald.

And yet I was still inspired enough to go home and play my guitar.

Ever try to gather a few hundred people at Carnegie Hall to have someone push a button. Hell, for a John Cage concert you still need an entire orchestra, even if they don't play a note.

I think its good that some cat in Brazil who would never have been able to conduct an orchestra can write a symphony. And if its any good, it will inspire musicians to play it.

Yes, there is a lot of crap... a lot more crap than ever...but making music is available to a broader group and the consequences are good. Not bad.

IMHO Ron


----------



## KEnK (Nov 9, 2014)

Ron-

Your sarcasm shows only how far removed recording technology has brought
us from what "music" is. (or was)

If you see a movie about being on a plane, do you think you're on the plane?
Of course not-

But most people think that what comes out of a set of car speakers 
is the direct genuine experience of "seeing" their favorite band.

To me- Music is only what happens when human beings 
pick up and perform on instruments.
What comes out of your stereo is not that experience,
and is in fact only a shadow of that reality.

It's a difficult concept to grasp.
I'm pretty sure there was music before the 20th century.
I'm pretty sure that it could only happen when musicians actually played instruments.

It is recording technology- all the way back to Edison Cylinder,
that has continuously usurped the place Music and Musicians 
have had in Society for actual centuries.

Sorry- I know my philosophical perspective here is rather unusual.
It's become an Abstract Concept-
Music requiring Musicians?
How absurd :wink: 

k


----------



## dpasdernick (Nov 9, 2014)

There has always been a ton of people writing music that was both good and bad. The difference is with venues like Itunes, youtube, and soundcloud we now have everthing just a click away. It's harder to weed out the good stuff. With every new genius artist we get 1000's of mediocre, or worse, recordings.


I love the DAW. It's what I dreamed about when all I had was a 4 track Portastudio and a Korg Poly 6.


----------



## chibear (Nov 9, 2014)

adriancook @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> chibear @ Sun Nov 09 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be playing cards or shuffleboard and letting my mind rot. .
> ...



Ha! Then I could regale the folks at the 'home' with my 108 variations on "We'll Meet Again"  

There's nothing wrong with my keyboard skills. I just haven't been able to find a model that plays the pitches I'm thinking. :roll:


----------



## Jetzer (Nov 9, 2014)

To me, listening to somebody's music played, recorded, programmed (etc.) exactly the way they wanted it (or the tools or technique allowed them to), is as emotional an experience as seeing someone playing an instrument 'live'. 

And I agree on both the good and bad arguments that many have stated above.


----------



## KEnK (Nov 9, 2014)

JH @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> To me, listening to somebody's music played, recorded, programmed (etc.) exactly the way they wanted it (or the tools or technique allowed them to), is as emotional an experience as seeing someone playing an instrument 'live'.
> 
> And I agree on both the good and bad arguments that many have stated above.


So then-

There's no difference between seeing someone perform a piece on a piano
directly in front of you and listening to a recording of it?

Kind of demonstrates what I'm saying-
Recording technology has rendered being a musician and live performance moot.

Disastrous o-[][]-o


----------



## givemenoughrope (Nov 9, 2014)

These threads are awful. Like early man screaming at a black monolith. 

If the tech allows you to do things that you couldn't do before that is a good thing. I can load up granulars, misc perc samples, and the sound of reversed anything across 4 machines...and in 10 minutes or less. Faster than pizza. That is a good thing. If I make crappy music with it then that is on me. 

I can also play a clarinet over it and then overdub guitar through delay that has a bpm sync. Real instruments. There you go. Mixed, stemmed out and in your dropbox by morning. 

Its a good thing. For me anyway. I can always go back to a piano or rocks and water or whatever. 

...back to it...


----------



## rJames (Nov 9, 2014)

KEnK @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> Ron-
> It's a difficult concept to grasp.
> I'm pretty sure there was music before the 20th century.
> I'm pretty sure that it could only happen when musicians actually played instruments.
> ...



If your point is that very few people before the 20th century got to experience great music, then I get your point.

The fact that a moving atmosphere, just waveforms hitting our eardrums can cause emotion to be experienced IS a difficult concept to grasp. The fact that the waveforms can be caused by musicians somewhere in the distant past and a distant place is, in fact, an Abstract Concept. So, you've definitely got me on this one.

For me, I am very happy that so many musicians have recorded their music to share with the masses instead of playing for just a few fortunate people who could afford the ticket price or who were invited by their rich friends.

Philosophically divided we are.


----------



## eric aron (Nov 9, 2014)

for me yes, mostly positive results. it first allowed to concretize my writing dreams in a time i couldn’t imagine having a real orchestra. (my first symphony was recorded with a Proteus 2 / Ensoniq Vfx + Atari Notator.. what a time..) then having possibility to blend the traditional orchestra with synthesizers and ambient sounds. having now tools that allow to write a symphony quickly than ever, with control on expression, tempi, orchestral palette. writing on paper being too slow for me, i can now orchestrate efficiently in realtime. as classical piano musician, i am in contact with my instrument, and playing a real instrument while working with a daw is a precious lifeguard. now with Youtube or similar, i am few clicks close to a huge choice of music, and can post there mine. all this is a such big facility for creative expression.

as downsides are the limits of the tools, which are greater than the limits of acoustic instruments. samples are cold and unexpressive compared to real. most soft synths sound the same dull. and then the plethora of choices is strongly reducing inspiration and productivity if you fall in the novelty trap (which is mostly an unconscious escape from the creative process efforts). also the growing artificial character of the sold tools, due to more cut contact with natural life expression. it secludes from inspiration and thus convincing results

now listening to what mostly comes from these generations of daw-music makers, there is clearly a slope down concerning inspiration, crafts and creativity. mediocrity has become ordinary because of the illusion of easy creation given by these tools, and also the upstream commercial-business oriented directions. fx become prior to music. laziness is replacing musical education. trends slavery is killing inspiration. who can pretend writing music without being able to play an acoustic instrument? playing everlasting new toys for instant gratification is more entertaining and easy.

there could be far more JWs on this planet. with the huge internet window on the world, everyone has possibility to access and develop values, and spread it. education, conscience and ethical choices are permanently available


----------



## KEnK (Nov 9, 2014)

One of the problems I see and have caused me to adopt this somewhat maverick perspective is that many people seem to think 
that what comes out of a speaker system is the exact same thing that a single
instrument or group of instruments makes.
It just isn't.

There is an actual difference between the sound of an instrument in a room
and a recording of it.

Further, I'm a jazz guitarist and I also play some of the classical repertoire.
Every performance I do is different, even when I play the same pieces.
Every recording I've ever made is irrelevant to how I'll play the piece next time.

Point is, a recording is not hearing me play, 
anymore than listening to a recording of a person speaking is conversing with them.

As to there being only virtuosos since music was recorded?
Or only great music since the 20 century?
I certainly don't think that and neither do you.
I don't really know where that's coming from.

I'm just expressing an opinion in answer to the o.p.

Recording is a mere Shadow of Music-
Exactly analogous to film being a Shadow of Physical Reality.

Yet somehow, over time this Representation of Music
has come to replace the Real thing.

Look at how offended people get when I say your speakers are not a piano.

Disastrous o/~ 

k


----------



## Guy Rowland (Nov 10, 2014)

KEnK @ Mon Nov 10 said:


> Exactly analogous to film being a Shadow of Physical Reality.
> 
> Yet somehow, over time this Representation of Music
> has come to replace the Real thing.
> ...



Dammit I told myself I wouldn't bite. But really...

Film is a shadow of physical reality. Ergo by the same logic, all film and TV ever made is a disaster, just as a DAW or any music tech from a wax cylinder to a bit crusher is a disaster. I think this is a very silly line of reasoning .

Perhaps slightly more on topic, notation has always fascinated me in terms both of its successes and failures. Evern today its the unquestioned method of communicating written musical information (though there are others for other instruments, such as guitar tabs). I think it is so pervasive, that people get confused that this is pure music itself, that the written form is somehow music in its purest form. I'd argue very much that it isn't - it's a flawed human construct designed to solve a problem as well as it is able. It has always been a barrier to overcome in the quest for musical expression.

For some sorts of composition, it does the job brilliantly. JW scoring Empire is a perfect example of someone skilled to a level of genius using this arcane language can get what is inside his head into the world for others to listen (shame only he and the musicians have ever truly appreciated it since us saps have to listen to a pale shadow of a recording, but I digress). But for other sorts of composition it is found desperately wanting. Playing middle C on a clarinet sounds rather different to playing middle C on texture created in Omnisphere with multiple CCs controling it dynamically. Composition has become far more than music created using fixed instruments and textures (of course it could well be argued it always was, but options used to be very limited to explore this).

With a DAW you can seamlessly marry timbre with tonal information. You are able to not only realise orchestral composition, but take it far beyond into practically any sort of sound imaginable. You might hear unreal sounds and textures in your head and search for them as you compose, or (I suspect more frequently) the process is a back and forth between the composer's intent and the creativity displayed by the tools they own, suggesting their own alternatives much like jamming with a guitarist becomes a fusion of talents. All paths are potentially valid for musical expression. Many will of course be artistically bankrupt in reality if the composer has no skill or talent - and this of course has also always been true - but its not necessarily for lack of value in the tools themselves.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 10, 2014)

*"Has the DAW had a positive or negative affect on the composition of modern film music, and moreover the musical ability of composers in general?"*

So - the focus of your question is composition, correct? OK - first the testimony then the broader answer.

This past summer I became the general editor for the Alex North Film Scoring series where we have released a first score (Bones) and this week the first video lecture on it. During the summer I had the opportunity to go through all the cues for 2001, Spartacus, and also had a look at Cleopatra main theme, Quo Vadis (Rozsa), The Salamander (Goldsmith), El Cid (Rozsa) and the Blue Max (Goldsmith).

It is wrong to say that the daw has had either a positive or negative effect on composition because daws don't teach composition and orchestration. They are a musical Pavlov's dog, doing what you tell it to do once you figure it out. To this must be added samples and as good as samples are, you cannot do the majority of orchestral devices with them. You have a limited set available, and then you have to test the samples to make sure they're capable of executing what you've written. 

Consequently, there's the dual learning curve of learning orchestral devices and then determining which ones can be replicated and in what time frame. 

After you've spent the summer and fall with the composer's i've listed, you experience a certain sadness in going back to a daw because you know the samples cannot execute most of which you've just studied especially dynamic equivalents and weighting.

Once you've spent the time woodshedding and learning to compose, compositional and scoring time is usually quite quick. This however is downturned by the time needed to do an effective professional midi mockup which includes doing the mix. Now if the composition is scored and orchestrated thoughtfully, you already have a work that's pre-mixed for live performance. But replicating that and quickly, can only be done if you've taken the time to set up a mature template that's ready to go once the system has been turned on. 

What lengthens the production time is the mixing time and getting everyone into the same room so that the template comes together and you're able to produce with near the speed you composed with.

Consequently, whether it's positive or negative really depends on whether or not the composer has chosen to learn to compose along the traditional approach of learning harmony, composition, counterpoint, and orchestration and really developed their musical imagination, or, have bypassed that in favor of letting samples, loops and other "composer packages" become the foundation for their musical imagination. 

This is really the dividing point which I see as a teacher. 

There is an attitude that the nature virginness of ones creativity is better untainted so that that which is created is original and pure. I see this attitude a lot. 

The problem with this attitude is that not only is it false, but also it's misleading as it denies the basic realization of just how much music has already been listened to and shaped the individuals musical imagination to begin with!

Modern orchestration has two points of discovery. The first is learning afresh while the second is identifying what you've already learned.

I also see two radical rebellions going on with some. One is the refusal to attend live concerts thinking that their samples are the end all. And the second is the absolute adamant resignation to not learn music notation so that you can take full advantage of resources like www.imslp.org. 

No one says you "must" study Bach and avoid parallel 5ths and octaves. That's academia. 

But yet, to have this ability to read provides you a musical mentor 24/7. And so many of these works are now up on YouTube. 

Never has there been a time to learn music with such effectiveness as now.

What the composer must determine for him or herself is how much they really and truly believe in themselves and are they willing to pay the price that some of us had to pay to really learn the craft because they know the music inside themselves is awesome and they are driven to learn to get it out and continue in its ongoing development. 

Finally, film composition is a broad category spanning from Hans Zimmer to John Williams and lots of styles in the middle.


----------



## eric aron (Nov 10, 2014)

notation is just a map, being far from perfect. and as to find the essence behind these abstract symbols, it requires mastery. years of training, talent and inspiration. and even for the very few to attain this level, the mystery remains

the purity obsession related to the score interpretation has buried more than one classical musician into his own intellectual grave. but in same time notation is our highest achievement as westerners, bringing to an apogee the horizontal and vertical writings. also allowing historical masterpieces to survive, and now recording big movies scores in less than a breath time

there are genius musicians who dont write or read notation. but they remain rare, and it works because they are superiorly moved and inspired

the now electronic creation possibilities are huge, but opened as well a pandora box. i want to believe that some part of it is a beginning of a new expressive way, but the results as for now are mostly not convincing. considering the expanded amount of people who have now access to these cheap technologies, it leaded to downside the level more than anything else. this added to the confusion sown by the post 1920 musical currents, we are now in a deep swamp. civilisation change on the way, i hope so.. now the big laboratory operates

listening to mp3s through a crap sound system won’t open the subtleties. same in playing and composing only with sample libraries without any real reference.. considering that most of us can’t afford a high end hifi system, going to live concert and learn to listen are in the priority list 

yesterday i was listening again to Tristan und Isolde, Carlos Kleiber/Staatskapelle Dresden version, the quality and inspiration of this music is so obvious, how can i listen after this to average music?

daw or not daw, when Music crosses the roads, it Is


----------



## KEnK (Nov 10, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Mon Nov 10 said:


> Dammit I told myself I wouldn't bite. But really...
> 
> Film is a shadow of physical reality. Ergo by the same logic, all film and TV ever made is a disaster, just as a DAW or any music tech from a wax cylinder to a bit crusher is a disaster. I think this is a very silly line of reasoning...


Hello Guy,
And thanks for the nibble. :wink: 

Just want to say my argument is no more or less silly than the entire thread.
(and it is something I've mulled over)
I'm simply not confining my answer to a singular aspect of either technology or music.
Most people who've posted their thoughts here do see at least some adverse impact of the DAW on film music. 
Some more than others.

If people think about it, they might see what it is I'm saying.
Sound systems of one type or another have practically replaced the musician as the source of the musical experience.
This is a kind of "virtual reality", so pervasive and accepted as the norm that people don't even want to acknowledge it.

You want to hear some music?
Just flick a switch, no need for a pesky human experience.
Just a few decades ago, if people wanted to experience music,
they had to see someone perform it.
Not anymore.

There are other aspects I've not alluded to here-

Mainly the degree of homogeneity gradually replacing regional musical dialects.
(I've seen vids of kids in Dubai trying to be rappers.)
Also the obvious loss of viable income for the vast majority of musicians.

Disaster~ ;/c]


----------



## eric aron (Nov 11, 2014)

yes, virtual expands everywhere its appealing mirage.. the consequences are already disastrous, no need to wait more.. simply looking to the nonsense brought by the 2 antagonist words "virtual reality”.. all was said long time ago about the intrinsic meaning. there is no more experience if you are separate from reality, just illusions repeating in addictive loops, which are leveling people in shiny jails.. Plato’s cave parable never were so accurate than now


----------



## Michael K. Bain (Nov 11, 2014)

dpasdernick @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> I love the DAW. It's what I dreamed about when all I had was a 4 track Portastudio and a Korg Poly 6.


I love the DAW as well, but my mind must not be as technically advanced as yours, ha ha. When I was working with nothing but a Kawai K3, a drum machine, and a Tascam 4 track recorder, I never could have even conceived of anything like a DAW. The only realization of any limitations of my setup was the occasional tape break. :D Wow, to think about those days now.


----------



## Alastair (Nov 20, 2014)

Thanks for all the responses guys! I love it when a good debate is created on a subject 



rgames @ Sun Nov 09 said:


> Alastair @ Sat Nov 08 said:
> 
> 
> > The current working title thusfar is as follows:
> ...



I've taken your advice - the title is now: "What effect has the DAW had on the composition of modern orchestral film music?"

I've also posted this survey to a few places. If anyone fancies filling it out then I'd be eternally grateful! 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/19mTlom ... U/viewform


----------



## Alastair (May 30, 2015)

And...as promised, the finished piece. Thankyou everyone for contributing, particularly those that gave lengthy responses! 

https://www.academia.edu/12232755/What_ ... film_music


----------



## KEnK (May 31, 2015)

I enjoyed reading your paper.
Thanks for posting-

As one of the naysayers, it remains my position
that the DAW's over-all impact on all forms of music
are in fact just as detrimental as what you've concluded
regarding film music-

But you did keep an open mind, presenting a balanced view
of both sides of the issue-

The only thing you said that I don't agree with
is concerning tempo changes- (tempo rubato specifically)
This can easily be accomplished in most DAWs,
especially when the input is only midi.

It really is as simple as drawing a line or inputting a few dots in the right place.
It is still possible to warp the time of recorded audio files-
just not as easily as w/ midi only.

Thanks for starting an interesting thread and following through

k


----------



## SeattleComposer (May 31, 2015)

Great topic. I read the headline and thought: "Define 'composition.'" I was giving a ride to a sound engineer the other day and I asked "what do you play?" He said "Nothing. I play my DAW." One of my friends who has a degree in music (but who is internationally famous for his sculpture, paintings, mixed media art and moonlights in a rock band in LA) recently scoffed (in my direction, I think) that "you don't have to be good" at music anymore. 
But IMHO the DAW is good. It has democratized composition. And to say that it broadens the musical pallet available to composers, is an understatement. Calling that an understatement, is also an understatement. It has left the door open to hacks, but it has also exponentially increased the knowledge available to hard-working, musically-minded composers. Everyday the technology brings new gifts. It's a very exciting time to be living in, musically.


----------



## tonaliszt (May 31, 2015)

Great Paper. The best part is the comments by composers at the end.


----------



## Joram (Jun 1, 2015)

Very interesting read!


----------

