Petition: Should all hosts have "render to track" feature?

[BONES]

Once again those who are opposed to this idea seem to be the people
who don't mind repetetive tasks because they can't conceive of coming up
with enough music containing enough ideas per song to understand the idea
of wasting time on foolishly implemented workflow.

Yeah, right. I've heard some of your krap and if that's your defintion of ideas then I should start photographing my leavings before I flush, for inspiration.

Unfortunately, making
boring music from templates is not the solution someone like me is looking
for.

So you're looking for a change of tack, eh?

I'm sure it's all well and good to say we have enough CPU power and use too
many effects when you're just copying someone else's pre-made genre/style.

Your first track reminds me of things like Death in June's Death of a Man from 1985 and a gazillion other things before and since. The rest of it that I listened to sounds likke early Human League, circa The Dignity of Labour, only much less interesting. Its certainly all devoid of ideas. That you see it as pushing any kind of boundaries just shows your ignorance.

How have we come to this stage where someone advocates dumbing down creativity
and imagination on a music discussion forum? How can this possibly be an issue
that intrudes into otherwise intelligent conversation every day?!

I see it as precisely the opposite. Having no limits allows you to work without any need for creative solutions to anything. Working within certain limitations forces you to be far more creative.

To such all-too-comon flippany and mockery I point out that if you can't wrap your
head around the concept that creative people want tools to efficiently bring to
fruition what races and writhes within their imagination then maybe you should
look into a non-musician interest, like maybe being a club DJ.

HA! You really are an ignorant deadshit, aren't you? DO you have any idea how many orders of magnitude more creative the tools we have today are than anythign that was available even 10 years ago. What you're suggesting is that it was impossible to be creative before Cubase. What an arsehole you are.

[runagate]

I'm afraid you can't get me going with that kind of comment.
I appreciate those too much - I like smack-talk too.

The only thing I gotta flip out about is

DO you have any idea how many orders of magnitude more creative the tools we have today are than anythign that was available even 10 years ago

which isn't what I'm saying at all.
Truly I do understand that, very much so.
That doesn't in any way ameliorate the fact that I want even smoother workflow
so I don't waste time monkeying around with the tools - I want only to "print them
to tape" for lack of newer metaphor.

*edit* You do know you're just copying the Killing Joke song that Ministry
got all their ideas from, don't you? You insult their corpus.

[kritikon]

I'm sure it's all well and good to say we have enough CPU power and use too
many effects when you're just copying someone else's pre-made genre/style.

What?

How on earth has CPU power or freezing got anything to do with what style of music one makes? I don't understand the inference at all. What you seem to be saying is that anyone who learns to use their tools must be making standard music...where on earth do you get that arrogant idea from? Your inference is that you are too much of a genius making genius music to learn how to use your DAW properly. Shortcuts are for geniuses only? And that anyone else that disagrees is making paint-by-numbers music.

You arrogant little shit.

You have no idea what music I or others make or have made. I have no idea what you make either...but I certainly don't like the attitude.


You might do well to actually read Bones posts sometimes a little deeper. Yeah, he can irritate the snot out of people if you read over the surface.

He pointed out that some of what is considered to be the most innovative, ground-breaking music of any of their respective genres were done on what you would find absolutely intolerable restrictions with your equipment. Pink Floyd, the Beatles, almost all of the first lot of dub, ALL of the first 80s techno/acid stuff was done on extremely simple gear, with very limited numbers of channels, with very limited FX and no undestructive editing. Some of the music made in the past was made on instruments that couldn't even link up with each other. Y'know...before midi was even invented...and some of that music still stands head and shoulders above alot of the shite that is out now. And alot of the shite out now is simply regurgitated shite - the kids think something is new, and often us old farts can tell you the song and band it was ripped off from 20 or 30 or 40 years ago.

Sure some new improvements are genuine improvements in music-making, and gives us more creativity potential. But clicking your mouse once instead of 3 times makes you a genius?

Yeah, right....you've alot to learn little boy.

[jens]

I can't believe you are really discussing this.

The whole pseudo-argument is utterly moot (just as most of Bones' arguments are) - it's just sooo silly because:


who's gonna decide what's the right amount of features? - who's going to decide which of them are needed and which of them are not? Wo is going to decide what's the right amount of complexity?

Is it Bones? Is Bones going to decide for the rest of us with his enormously undersized brain?

I mean: he obviously has a computer. He obviously uses plugins and some sort of digital hardisk-recording to record his dead-boring wannabe-angry vocals.

He obviously uses a midi-sequencer of some sorts to produce his pathetic ebm rip-offs. Yadda yadda yadda.

He obviously doesn't just play on a harp in the woods (and even a harp was ultramodern the day it has been invented).

'harp? - thou dost not need this fashionable modern gear - I tell thee - it merely kills your creativity!'

It is incredibly short-sighted and narrow-minded to try to enforce the own poor horizon as the valid border for others. 'I do not need it hence it must be useless for everyone.':nutter:

[jens]

He pointed out that some of what is considered to be the most innovative, ground-breaking music of any of their respective genres were done on what you would find absolutely intolerable restrictions with your equipment. Pink Floyd, the Beatles, almost all of the first lot of dub, ALL of the first 80s techno/acid stuff was done on extremely simple gear

yeah, right...





- this is just sooo dumb - all the examples you mentioned used ultra-modern stuff - only compared to today's standards it could be considered simple.

You could as well tell a physician to leave the laser and the neon-lights away when operating.

[superddman]

BONES and rounser: So you guys are basially saying that when it comes to music production, the slower you get tasks done the more creative you are?
I can't believe what I am hearing here hehe

[tomg]

All I need to make music is to hum... That's all I'll need.
Maybe I could sing.. Yeah! That's all I'll need.
I could play a little... A guitar maybe? .. That's all I'll need.
Not really all that full... A keyboard.. That's all I'll need.
I could record my music.. A Computer.. That's all I'll need.
Maybe a sequencer and some VSTs and a better sequencer and some effects and a modular synthesizer and some faster hard drivers and a laptop and and and and and... Yeah!.. That's all I'll need.

Alright! Just give me the damned button then..

[toine6]

I'm waiting for the thoughts to music plug in.. That's all I'll need.

[BONES]

*edit* You do know you're just copying the Killing Joke song that Ministry
got all their ideas from, don't you? You insult their corpus.

And which particular Killing Joke song would that be? I once wrote a song in the style of Rubicon but, as is inevitably the case, it turned out sounding very different. I've also been working on a cover of Butcher but I think it will end up being something else. Anyway, thanks for the compliment, they are and have always been my favourite band.

BONES and rounser: So you guys are basially saying that when it comes to music production, the slower you get tasks done the more creative you are?
I can't believe what I am hearing here hehe

How do you conclude that? Certainly I try to take my time but I never bump into any limitations of my equipment because just knowing what they are is enough that they should never become an issue. The simple fact is that I can work all day and rarely get over 50% CPU usage, even using lots of my own CPU-intensive SE synths. I can have 8 or 10 parts running with no problems whatsoever. Of course you would never be able to distinguish that many things happenning at once so the norm is more like 4 or 5, which generally yields around 30% CPU usage on my two year old PC.

All I need to make music is to hum...

They were drawn towards the hum
Plenty more where they come from

[rounser]

BONES and rounser: So you guys are basially saying that when it comes to music production, the slower you get tasks done the more creative you are?
I can't believe what I am hearing here hehe

Nope. I've taken both sides and am fencesitting, if you pay attention to what I've written.

Limitations breed creativity, but so do powerful features. It's like those Aesop's fables that contradict one another - both can be right depending on the circumstances. You need to judge each case on it's merits.

I'm surprised you think that "limitations breed creativity" isn't true, though, because there's lots of evidence for it. It might not be true in the case of this particular feature, but then I'm not arguing that it is.

[superddman]

BONES and rounser: So you guys are basially saying that when it comes to music production, the slower you get tasks done the more creative you are?
I can't believe what I am hearing here hehe

Nope. I've taken both sides and am fencesitting, if you pay attention to what I've written.

Limitations breed creativity, but so do powerful features. It's like those Aesop's fables that contradict one another - both can be right depending on the circumstances. You need to judge each case on it's merits.

I'm surprised you think that "limitations breed creativity" isn't true, though, because there's lots of evidence for it. It might not be true in the case of this particular feature, but then I'm not arguing that it is.

Exactly.

We are talking about software for making music, not astronomy.
So why people continue talking about creativity here?!?

[brambos]

BONES and rounser: So you guys are basially saying that when it comes to music production, the slower you get tasks done the more creative you are?
I can't believe what I am hearing here hehe

I know that back in the day when I was making MODs on an amiga and I only had 4 (mono) channels at my disposal I thought a lot harder and better about how to best use them in my songs. Not saying I want to go back to systems like that, but it did spark creativity and made you think about what *really* mattered in your tracks.

[headquest]

Actually you don't get the real differnce, FREEDOM.

I think that argument actually applies back to your original post

Give the host developers the FREEDOM to implement rendering/bouncing and freeze the way they see best. And give the rest of us the FREEDOM to choose which host we then use.

[superddman]

Actually you don't get the real differnce, FREEDOM.

I think that argument actually applies back to your original post

Give the host developers the FREEDOM to implement rendering/bouncing and freeze the way they see best. And give the rest of us the FREEDOM to choose which host we then use.

So you have never requested features/changes from software developers? Very classy of you.

[headquest]

So you have never requested features/changes from software developers? Very classy of you.

Yeah, all the time. .

But I've never asked for there to be a petition insisting that ALL the developers implement the SAME thing. Seriously, how boring would that be?