2 ms·

DAWs haven't converged on a "best" approach. Most use a traditional linear workflow that's essentially a digital multitrack tape, but Ableton and Bitwig use a c

DAWs haven't converged on a "best" approach. Most use a traditional linear workflow that's essentially a digital multitrack tape, but Ableton and Bitwig use a clip-based workflow that tends to be better suited to improvisation and live performance. I think the factor you're missing is path dependence. The approach that becomes dominant isn't necessarily "best", just a stable equilibrium where switching costs are greater than potential benefits for most users. I'm typing this comment on a QWERTY keyboard, but I don't believe for one second that it's the optimal layout - I just can't be bothered to learn Dvorak or Colemak or whatever.

robenkleene 3y ago
Clip-based workflow was facilitated by technology progress (e.g., Moore's law) which unlocks new design space (similar pattern to why Lightroom was "invented" so long after Photoshop). I.e., doing things real-time or non-destructively as computers get faster is really common, so that happens then the design space gets exhausted again. The key point being this happens quickly once the new approaches are possible. The piece I linked to makes all these points, as well as addressing your others.
jimmySixDOF 3y ago
DAWs should be rebuilt from the ground up, component by component, feature by feature, in 3D for XR(VR/MR/AR) where ultimately you can see the waveform as it is --- a 3D object , and interact with it like a sculpture or a Theremin experience. 2D screens, Keyboards, and a mouse are not the best fit.
- ta988 3y ago
  That would be really fun for sound sculpting but this is a pretty small part of composition. Also one thing to remember is that anytime you want to optimize a workflow you want to reduce the number and amplitude of physical movements. Which is a big limitation of any XR tools for now that are nowhere as precise, high velocity and usable for long stretch of time than kb/mouse/screen/controllers. I really see hybrid approaches winning here instead of full blown replacement of current tools.

robenkleene 3y ago

Clip-based workflow was facilitated by technology progress (e.g., Moore's law) which unlocks new design space (similar pattern to why Lightroom was "invented" so long after Photoshop). I.e., doing things real-time or non-destructively as computers get faster is really common, so that happens then the design space gets exhausted again. The key point being this happens quickly once the new approaches are possible. The piece I linked to makes all these points, as well as addressing your others.

jimmySixDOF 3y ago

DAWs should be rebuilt from the ground up, component by component, feature by feature, in 3D for XR(VR/MR/AR) where ultimately you can see the waveform as it is --- a 3D object , and interact with it like a sculpture or a Theremin experience. 2D screens, Keyboards, and a mouse are not the best fit.

ta988 3y ago
That would be really fun for sound sculpting but this is a pretty small part of composition. Also one thing to remember is that anytime you want to optimize a workflow you want to reduce the number and amplitude of physical movements. Which is a big limitation of any XR tools for now that are nowhere as precise, high velocity and usable for long stretch of time than kb/mouse/screen/controllers. I really see hybrid approaches winning here instead of full blown replacement of current tools.