It's not silly, it's basic fundamentals. If you are not listening to your music at the beggining of its creation, how could you expect someone else to listen to it. I think their is too much reliance on technolgy.
the bolded part is what's just plain silly.
"not listening to your music?" come on, now, think about that... not one person is chopping utilizing a waveform display without listening to the slices as they do it. that's your assumption - that it's either X or Y when ideally it's a combination. a "scrub" feature coupled with a vertically/horizontally zoomable waveform is simply the most accurate combination possible without adding a spectroscope into the mix...
BUT, that being said, by virtue of horizontal and vertical zooming, i could easily chop a break "deaf," relying solely on the waveform, more precisely than anyone could "blind" without said waveform. that's just the way it is, it's like comparing a microscope to a glass eye. without listening to the music as i'm chopping it, i could in fact slice it "better" than if i were listening til my eardrums bled. the resulting slices would be slightly tighter.
the question is, of course, at such small values of inprecision, does it matter if the "blind" slicer's slices are less accurate than my "deaf" slices in this example?
not at all. the end listener wouldn't (and hasn't) noticed.
it dont matter how you chop. period. But, you shouldn't be held back by not being able to see waveforms. If you prefer using your eyes and ears then more power to ya.
