Cool read, though I wish the photographer and taken a bit more care getting some of the photos in focus! But yeah, even with my electronic music I have noticed my best stuff is made in the shortest time periods. It reminds me of this quote from Woody Allen:

'The best an idea gets is when it's in your head. From then on, it's just a matter of how much you ruin it.'

Spending too much time tweaking and tuning the idea not only removes it further form the original concept but makes you lose the interest and excitement you had in it. I did my degree dissertation on how music technology has affected composition and I think a couple of the paragraphs from it may be relevant here. The first is about how over-production can affect the compositional process:

A study by Chris Watson on interaction with music notation software (henceforth referred to as MNS) presented some interesting observations. With the instant playback of music and ability to hone in on a specific part of the composition, a considerable amount of time was spent just listening to a small snippet of music. Up to 44% of the total working time was solely spent listening to the music. Modification and input of new material was usually brief and interspersed with short auditions of the new sounds. The most interaction happens at the point where the music ‘runs out’ (Watson, 2006). In his article “Spectromorphology: explaining sound-shapes”, Denis Smaley analyses this method of ‘reduced listening’ as helpful as it is damaging. For one, many composers believe this reduced listening as an ultimate form of perceptual contemplation. However, once they’ve discovered an aural interest in the minute details it can become increasing difficult to once more perceive the piece as a whole. “Secondly, microscopic perceptual scanning tends to highlight less pertinent, low-level, intrinsic detail such that the composer-listener can easily focus too much on background at the expense of foreground.” This results in perceptual distortions for the composer, despite the advantages of encouraging deeper exploration (Smalley, 1997).

This second excerpt is some opinions on how technology can effect creativity in a recording situation:

As an expansion of this, music producer Robert DiFazio argues that digital sound recording has lowered the artists expectations of themselves. “When the clients know they’re on tape, they’re on point. They’re not expecting me to work miracles as soon as I hit stop...If you screw up, this is not a keeper.” Digital recording has allowed people to not make decisions and essence of performance is lost with excessive post-production editing (DiFazio, 2007). Indeed, this a common negative viewpoint. Simon Frith comments on the opinion that technology is somehow false or falsifying. Technology creates an artificial presence which acts as a barrier between composers and their audiences. This is unnatural, alienating and empties music performance of creativity and expressiveness. Frith opposes this view, however, stating that technology is more often an aid rather than an obstacle. Digital technology enhances creative production by providing sounds and tools that would otherwise be inaccessible (Frith, 1986) (Solomon, 2012). Lowis shares a similar standpoint.