> DAWs often operate much more like a game wherein the screen is animated and has 60fps of stuff going on.
This is puzzling to me. Do sighted DAW users really rely on such a high-bandwidth, continuous flow of visual information? What kind of information? Mainly volume meters, or other things as well?
FWIW, I'm just starting to dabble with a DAW myself. But I know that blind people have successfully done all stages of music and other audio production using a DAW. From what I understand, they do it by concentrating solely on the audio itself during real-time playback and recording. But the UI does need to be accessible for non-real-time work, e.g. plugin configuration, switching tracks, switching instruments, or making precise edits.
At least VST allows you to switch to and from using basic controls and the full plugin UI. Actually, if your plugin does not provide a UI, the DAW host will provide a generic one for you, with basic controls like sliders, drop-down menus, etc. that map to the parameters that your plugin use. You should probably just use those if you are blind, again assuming that the host provides all the accessibility features you need (I am not sure if all VST hosts do, you should check).
This is puzzling to me. Do sighted DAW users really rely on such a high-bandwidth, continuous flow of visual information? What kind of information? Mainly volume meters, or other things as well?
FWIW, I'm just starting to dabble with a DAW myself. But I know that blind people have successfully done all stages of music and other audio production using a DAW. From what I understand, they do it by concentrating solely on the audio itself during real-time playback and recording. But the UI does need to be accessible for non-real-time work, e.g. plugin configuration, switching tracks, switching instruments, or making precise edits.