--- In Walter Knapp <> wrote:
> Syd Curtis wrote:
> >
> >>From: Dan Dugan <>
> >
> >
> >>It's customary to call any computer running sound editing software a
> >>DAW. It isn't pretentious, just common.
> >>
> >>-Dan Dugan
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Sorry Dan, but I have to differ. "Uncommon," I would say. I've been
> > recording wildlife sounds since 1968, and using computers since
about '86.
> > I lack the the technical knowledge fully to follow everything you
experts
> > discuss, but at least I've heard of what you are are talking about and
> > follow the general drift. It is uncommon for something to be
mentioned that
> > I haven't at least heard of.
> >
> > In fact, DAW may be the first.
>
> In the area of music recording it's a bit more common to hear it. I
> heard the term some time back. And it originally was a sort of
> computerized mixing board, at least the first I saw. It grew from there
> into a mixing console with considerable sound processing capability.
The
> core of a full sound studio in many cases. Capable of handling large
> numbers of inputs and recording devices.
It came into common terminology in music recording with respect to
desktop computers with the advent of Pro Tools. I don't believe that
large numbers of inputs were a defining element, as many of these Pro
Tools/Audiomedia systems were capable of only 4-8 tracks. Before that,
devices such as the Roland VS880 were known as DAWs. Many could record
only 4 tracks at once, IIRC. Now, they are labeled as "hard drive
recorders", and DAW has morphed into usage in regard to desktop or
laptop computers with audio processing as a primary focus. The
processing power of a $1000 DAW these days far surpasses that of the
VS880.
>
> In the music area you can now have folks referring to their DAW, and
all
> they are talking about is a consumer level desktop computer with a
> soundcard in their house, sometimes with no more software than is basic
> to Windows, or maybe a mp3 encoder/player added.
I participate in a number of music recording USENET groups. Generally,
to be considered a DAW in our world, a computer has a second dedicated
hard drive for audio capture, and nonlinear editing software of some
flavor. Most "true" DAWs have a dedicated operating sytem partition
for audio processing, or only run audio applications to begin with. A
consumer level computer with a $100 dollar soundcard can certainly be
a DAW, IMO. Interestingly, "workstation" is the bottom class for
computers in current ad-speak.
> The other misused term
> in this regard is Studio. Which can be little more than a couple
> panasonic capsules wired up for stealth "binaural" recording.
I'll pass on this one. "Sound Engineers" are my favorite whipping
post, personally.
>
> If someone mentions doing something on their DAW now, I'm more
likely to
> get the 2nd picture, not the first. The use of the term DAW in this
> regard is recent, I first heard people doing it only this year.
It seems to have been gathering momentum for about 3-4 years. Five
years ago, I went to a specialist who offered me Pro Tools, or...not
much else. Now, compilation disks from our USENET "hobbiest" groups
are fully ready for commercial airplay (not that this means all that
much these days).
>
> For me I do sound processing on my computer, a G4 Mac. The same one
that
> processes my digital camera images, does "desktop publishing", all
sorts
> of graphics, runs the digitizing software for my machine embroidery
> (when I'm not doing that on our PC), graphs the progress of my
diabetes,
> acts as internet server to the rest of the house and which I'm writing
> on right now. As well as a whole bunch of other things. It would feel
> insulted to be called a DAW.
Ah, but PCs are used to being insulted <g>. My computer could be
called a DAW when I boot into the stripped WIN 98SE partition that has
only that OS and a handful of audio applications installed. The rest
of the time, it's just a home computer, I guess. My wife sees it a bit
differently though, given the cabling nightmare and stack of speakers,
mixers, and so on that surrounds it.
> And I don't have a studio, except all the
> outdoors.
I envy you there. Musicians are very difficult animals to work with.
...back to lurk mode,
________________Charlie Escher
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|