Too predetermined
The Mad Professor is one of the greatest dub philosophers ever. He has explained his ideas in many interviews. In a documentary called 'Dub stories' he says this about computers and dub equipment:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bd413/bd413b2befd95fbea7764d2e20eaf1df7c635757" alt=""
The thing with computers
It's not that computers suck completely. In the studio they are good for certain things like sequencing and correcting a mix but they fail miserably when it comes to creating exiting sounds. You can't really abuse computers. They'll just freeze or produce boring clicks and digital noise.
Certain plugin developers and producers use tricks like buffer override (glitches) or digital quirks like the autotune effect but 90% of all digital effects and instruments is just imitation of some analog thing. Some are good imitations, others are not so good. The bad imitations are probably the most interesting for dub, like the lofi retro 8-bit sound from the Jahtari camp.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/055a4/055a484cde6f8d230b9b00c1a5a1f6f3199eeca3" alt=""
Hacking, modding, circuit bending, diy
Long before computer nerds started hacking their digital toys the analog sound engineering community was already doing the same thing. Only it wasn't called hacking but modding or circuit bending or diy. King Tubby hacked his mixing desk. The Mad Professor went diy all the way creating his own effects, most notably the Warbler, a monumental sounding and instantly recognizable filter for bass instruments. That's the technical or scientific side of dub. To create a sound identity you have to know a lot about your equipment.
Soldering vs programming
Veteran dub scientists like King Jammy, Scientist and the Mad Professor have a deep understanding of electronics. But somehow designing and soldering your own equipment seems to have become a thing for electro purists and Jean Michel Jarre fans. Fortunately the knowledge itself is still moving forward, just look at the archives of the synth diy list.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd1a0/cd1a0d86fd3f7b63d4fcda095b31cc43e9395eb2" alt=""
Feedback vs latency
My fundamental issue with tools like Max is that they are locked up inside a box that's separated from the real time world by a barrier called 'latency'. If you send a sound into a pc for processing you typically have to wait a beard-growing 10 to 30 milliseconds before it comes out again. This means that with the computer equipment that's now commercially available you can't do a proper 'analog style' feedback loop.
At the end of the day a pc or a mac or a laptop is just a souped-up typewriter. These things were never designed to be used as real time dub machines. Feedback is perhaps the most basic sound shaping trick in dub. It's a standard feature on almost any hardware effect (echo, flanger, phaser, filters, distortion, fm etc). Computers can't really do that because of latency. They only do the rigorously calculated super clean type of feedback and that's not good enough. For lively sounding feedback you need a certain 'analog' kind of randomness that can work it's magic in the loop, almost like a sonic butterfly effect. So maybe you shouldn't take that 'making the complex simple' line of the software marketeers too serious because even a little bit of 'real' feedback can make the most boring sound come alive instantly. King Tubby's test tone is the ultimate example.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7df0f/7df0f1053526f1232fee03f90e39f075ef0a70df" alt=""
Nerdy, slow, buggy and counterintuitive but very educational
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7b0d8/7b0d8a18b5a86ca14fc87588e3d2da03d741e71a" alt=""