>>375648

My immediate snarky response would be : "Do we ask Nine Inch Nails, Chemical Brothers, Deadmau5, etc why they don't use laptops, too?"

A few of my standard responses that don't come down to philosphical arguments:
- I prefer the tactile feel of the interfaces on hardware better. Its not just about the sound but also the way to create it. I desire the look and feel because it amplifies my creativity. Do you prefer lingerie or "granny-panties"? Boxers or briefs?

- I am not restricted to the set of rules of the designer imagined. This is the same reason for modular versus stand- alone or multiple synths rather than just one workstation. I can do unexpected things with hardware easier. Hardware / analogue is more easily hacked for new functionality.

- Sound quality is better on a machine that was designed for professional sound rather than a machine that was designed for a email / internet. I can always reduce sound quality later, i can't improve it once it's recorded.

- Dedicated Laptop / desktop + sequencing software/ good recording suite + soundfiles/plug-in generally is not much cheaper than a modest hardware set-up in the end. Add more cost if you want to bring in outside sounds from vocals / traditional instruments. It's just lower costs up-front.

- Software licenses expire, are non-transferable. Hardware can be resold.

- Support goes away and updates are not made for new computer architecture of past products rendering them incompatible with modern machines. (e.g. Apple's lack of support for eMagic; E-MU recording cards don't have drivers past Windows 7). You will eventually need to buy the new product. I still see old Moogs still in use more often than old Toshiba Techra laptops.

- If you want to play live gigs, your audience may not be entertained by watching you hit "play" on a laptop. You will need to invest in visual equipment / software, play additional instruments, breakdance or something. A venue of live music will expect this as well.