Bless. There are some things that was always elicit a response from many producers and DJs out there. Does vinyl really sound better than digital? Was music better in the 1990s than it is today? And so forth.
So when Attack Magazine disputed the idea that all DAWs sound a little different, they took all of three months to publish a response, such was the reaction against it. They’ve done a detailed experiment into this, which you can read in the link here. Get a cup of coffee beforehand, as it’s a bit of a long one.
They seemed somewhat taken aback by the ferocity of the response against what they said. In a way, I can understand why. What they said really isn’t controversial. When I listen to something, I might be able to work out a synth that was used when making it. I’ve never been able to work out the software used, in comparison.
No, I think the response is an internet thing. Have you ever noticed that an admission from someone that they’re wrong on a subject is as rare as hen’s teeth online? I rarely see anyone write “you know what? I was wrong. I was talking complete bollocks. I’ve changed my mind”.
For some weird reason, a lot of people think that changing your mind on something is a sign of weakness. Specifically in music, I see it more with people who use Ableton than anything else. They’ve got the most expensive, fanciest DAW on the market, and nothing beats it. Infacts, not only does nothing beat it, but they feel the need to do everything else down in the process.
Claiming that all your rivals are shit doesn’t automatically make you good, you know…