ADHD and hardware vs DAWs

The Lounge General Discussion
#1

I had always been of the mindset that hardware was a bit of a ‘luxury’ and that anyone with the right mindset and talent could make great music in a DAW, without the need for it. (Still true!)

However, over the course of long lockdowns in my city, I TOTALLY lost any urge to make music within a computer - in the same room with the same computer that I worked on all day (and night, sometimes) :disappointed:

Subsequently, I acquired a few things progressively (2nd hand Nord Electro, Digitakt and Digitone), and although the learning curve was a initially a bit slow, gradually found myself just enjoying working with these tools more and more.

I think I’d always dismissed hardware enthusiasts as being a bit elitist, or simply justifying GAS by saying ‘it’s more hands on’ or whatever. :roll_eyes:

HOWEVER…

…I have found that I find it a much more focused state, working with a select few tools (especially when I work JUST with the Digitakt). I find it a bit more ‘in the zone’ and that I have less propensity to get lost in all the options of the DAW, endless samples and VSTs.

Whether it’s the physicality of working with a ‘real’ instrument versus a mouse and screen, or if it’s just more ‘fun’ or if it’s the challenge of being more resourceful within the limits of hardware, I’m not sure. :thinking:

I also have ADHD, and I wondered how others have found this contrast between software and hardware works with their own ways of thinking and propensity for distraction.

Keen to hear your thoughts!

7 Likes
#2
1 Like
#3

I don’t have adhd, but I was also sucked in my computer last 3 years. No computer in my music making anymore.

My computer is both associated with work and with distraction. Since my analog four still has no YouTube incorporated, when in a room with my a4 I only make music

3 Likes
#4

Yeah, it’s this.

I mean, I can get in the zone with Ableton, but I can just as equally end up wasting time on YouTube or some other nonsense!

1 Like
#5

I never got distracted with Youtube etc. when trying to make music in Ableton. But Covid (meetings on a laptop in my tiny apartment all day) finally killed all the little vibe left.

The bigger aspect for me that made me more productive on hardware is that it is a lot more streamlined. As I have written elsewhere: Elektron gear makes it so easy to just play in a sequence live and have it quantized. Or to live record automations. I never got Ableton to work like that. I find it very irritating when people speak about the steep learning curve on Elektrons - I found the way they handle things very intuitive from the beginning (starting with DN/DT).

Having knobs and sliders that are dedicated also goes a long way of course, so you can build up a muscle memory that someone clearly has thought about. With a DAW, you have to establish your own templates and routines, which I think is harder without any knowledge of hardware synths or drum machines. I feel like having used some hardware definitely helps you with a DAW, to get a deeper understanding what all these plugins are actually emulating. And then at some point you might decide to go back to focus on the DAW, but have the experience of working with old fashioned hardware.

3 Likes
#6

Yeah, I feel this on so many levels.

I don’t feel that the learning curve was steep on the DT, or DN - there is a beautiful logic to most of the Elektron UI and workflow.

(The only thing is getting the muscle memory for all of the secondary functions, that too me a while, and a few deleted patterns!)

And yes, it has DEFINITELY helped me grasp the power of simple, fundamental things like ADSR, envelopes and LFOs, and just how far you can take one sound with a sampler.

I think it’s made me a more resourceful producer in that sense. Rather than reach for (yet!) another tool or VST, I think more about ‘what more can I do with THIS?’

I think this has a secondary benefit of bringing a great level of sonic coherence to your projects, too.

1 Like
#7

I’m the same. gimme a Digitakt and I’m happy. focused. it’s all I really need.

#8

Yeah. I think a DAW is awesome if you already know what you want to do and how to use these plugins. If you have no idea, it’s really hard to pick tutorials and work into it. DN/DT present you with a limited set of options that teach you all the basics along the way. Cuckoo’s DN tutorial alone already taught me more about making an electronic song than loads of Ableton tutorials and time.

1 Like
#9

I’ll have to check that one out. Cuckoo is indeed one of the greats - and has the most relaxing voice on YouTube!

:joy:

1 Like
#10

I actually enjoy working in Ableton and Reason, and have lots of plugins that keep the variety / novelty aspect that my ADHD demands! Reason can give me more of a hardware feel, the players (sequencers) are great and its just fun to wire things up in odd ways. The computer is where I am productive and write songs.

On the other hand, I love having hardware just to immerse myself in sound. I try to keep things pretty simple - just a Torso T1 sequencer controlling a Minifreak is my current playground. The minifreak goes through my OT which gives me more to play with for a bit of variety. I never aim to write songs with hardware (although it does happen sometimes), its just the pleasure of playing with sound for me.

So yeah, DAW when I want to write songs, hardware when I want to get lost in the music!

4 Likes
#11

Interesting topic. I have ADHD and I spent years years making music entirely in the box, before switching to a hardware-only setup. Now I have a hybrid workflow and I have some observations about how things work for me, specifically when it comes to ADHD.

DAWs are the best tool. There is no other tool that can do what a DAW can do. If you’re trying to solve a specific problem, or you have a specific goal, a DAW is almost always the best thing you could use. However the way my brain works means that even when I start with a specific goal, I’m easily distracted and can lose my way as a result.

The problem with DAWs is that they have so many options, so many possibilities, that I can easily end up down various rabbit holes trying to fix problems that don’t exist, or losing sight of my original path. It’s hard to see the wood for the trees.

This manifested in my music as tracks with too many different ideas competing for attention. I’d write a track with three or four hooks, and it’d be impossible to know which one is “the hook”. I’d also have overly complicated mixes which would end up sounding bad because I had gigantic chains of plugins all fighting to fix a bad sound, instead of just changing the sound itself.

With hardware, the simplicity solved these problems. Hardware allows me to focus on one thing at a time. If I’m using a synth, it’s just a synth; it’s not anything else, so I’ll work within that limitation until I have something simple that works.

The downside to that is that when I do want to do more, I can’t. Sometimes the key to the right sound is the emergence of the synth when combined with a certain effect, or maybe even some interplay with other elements via sidechaining or something. This lack of flexibility is where hardware falls short. It’s great for playing with ideas, but terrible for finishing them.

I’m now working between the two. I use the Maschine+ for sketching out ideas, and hardware synths for isolated sound design duties, and then I arrange and mix in a DAW. I still suffer the downsides of both approaches, but they are slightly mitigated by one another.

3 Likes
#12

Couldn’t agree more. I need to get away from the computer for similar reasons, and I also have ADHD. I’ve always thought that hardware helps me put blinders on and stay better focused. And the pandemic and double-doses of covid made my ADHD worse. But I also blame ADHD on many of gear purchases that are sitting in the corner. But I’m not complaining. :slight_smile:

#13

Don’t have ADHD (i don’t think!) but yeah agree with the sentiment here - I find my polyend tracker to be amazing for this - I get way too distracted on a DAW with the internet lurking and endless options.
I’ve built up my muscle memory and am really quick to get stuff done, and can sit anywhere doing it. Just wish the tracker was stereo and sounded as good as a DAW!

1 Like
#14

The “DAWless” phenomena would appear to be, if not directly ADHD-related, a similar phenomena.

I have good results from playing live into the DAW to record and arrange afterwards, I also observe good results from recording a knob-tweaked song mode into the DAW.

Starting on the DAW in arranger, I can sometimes build off and sometimes I end up smooshing around a 2m lump of notes that does not expand a ton into the time domain.

Sans-Overbridge, it can be a burden to get started with some hardware configurations I have in the tracking stage and passing through FX/conditioning/texturizing processors.

It’s a trade-off, I’m always trying to figure out the best optimization of creating a motion and humanizing chords and changes.

I should definitely just say fuck it and do more atonal, uncentered techno, of course.

I haven’t yet figured the best way to create collateral (samples, loops, constructed breaks) and integrate with my hardware setup, maybe drop a skeleton of the segments I want with basic Ableton instruments with a basic melody, swap out with a MonoMachine/Digitone song.

Sketching rapidly to visualize time on the arranger is something I need to get better at!

Maybe even just creating “A” “B” “C”… empty MIDI color blocks to drop and space things out…

I could even set up volume level automation on the empty block to reflect Chorus1/2/final, Verse, Bridge, intro/outtro, whatever “addiction formula” style visualization of song cadence and help me mimic in other tracks + develop transitions to drop, raise, or maintain energy.

#15

limitations that channel creativity (but not so limiting that they stifle it) can be a good thing. the paradox of choice is real

3 Likes
#16

I actually read a book called ‘The Paradox of Choice’ - by Barry Schwarz, if I recall correctly.

Excellent book - highly recommended articulation of the subject.

1 Like
#17

Kindly permit this old fart to remind you kids that for a lot of us starting out the DAW was still 20 years away from being invented, and that hardware was a necessity not a luxury, because if you wanted to make electronic music hardware was the only way.

For me personally I did try using a DAW for a few years, but hated it, because I was more used to hardware, and didn’t like waiting around for a computer to boot up, update, driver hassles etc etc. Both methods are valid, alone or together, whatever works, works.

I do use computers in my setup, a windows 10 desktop for sample management, and a Commodore 64 for synthesis and sequencing, I prefer using the C64 to the PC.

Hardware can be a right hassle too, but for different reasons, you pick yer poison.

5 Likes
#18

Sure thing - totally valid points.

In a lot of ways, a DAW is simpler - in the sense that you can easily route all kinds of FX and sounds in many different ways easily - where as hardware requires various cables and dongles and so forth to get chains of FX and sounds working together.

I think it’s a bit of a balance. Perhaps when working with a DAW it really helps to consciously reduce which tools you focus on within it. Funnily enough, my time spent with the DT and DN have really underscored just how much sonic territory you can cover with just a sampler and a synth.

#19

I think that Stravinsky called it the Paradox of Freedom. Stick someone in front of a piano with no knowledge of the rules and parameters of piano and tell them to play. They will often have no idea what to do. And will just sit there. There is too much freedom, so they don’t feel free at all. But teach them the rules and parameters and they feel much more free.

3 Likes
#20

It’s one of the reasons I try to stay away from my computer during the early phases of music making. There so many distractions that suddenly the

2 Likes