Analog vs digital recording?

Well yeah....analog gear can require a lot of TLC. Tape decks are all "used" gear at this point, so no easy way to keep them going, though surprisingly enough, there are some pro/full-time use decks that were built exceptionally well, especially when you get toward the end of the tape deck manufacturing years....so once you set them up, they just run and run and run.
Still, these days you kinda’ want to have some spare parts on hand if possible, since they are getting older and older with every use...they can also develop issues unexpectedly.

Other than tape decks, which have way many moving parts....the other analog gear (consoles, preamps, mics, compressors, etc) can run for years and years and years, with only the occasional calibration, or tube swap, or maybe a recap.....no different than your typical guitar amp.

When you consider all that....how many people have a running computer that they still use that is 15-20-30 years old....???
Not many.
So there are drawbacks on both sides.
What I really like about a lot of the "decent" analog gear is that it's like an investment that keeps giving for a long time, unlike disposable/upgradable software and digital gear.
That said....I do have digital gear that's going on 15 years now, and still working....but that's mainly 'cuz I skipped like a half dozen upgrades and I didn't feel like constantly buying new computers and software to sorta’ do what I was already doing. :D

I got love....and occasional hate....for both analog and digital. When both are working well, it's a dream...when they are not, it's equally painful...be it analog or digital.
 
Heij
I`m a newbie around, love my old Fostex 80 and the Akai GX630D for mastering. Yes, they need a loving hand but the reward is sounding fine. Some may say "it`s noisy like a waterfall"... Yes, i admit a bit of sss but it is fun to me working with the old school stuff and the computer comes i when everything`s ready.
For going digital i use a Tascam US-122-L with Audacity- fine and free. So- i may represent the dinosaurs, having tapes spin and if something goes wrong zziiipp back and again we go. Take seventeen :facepalm: ;)
To me it`s just a hobby, my kind of creativity. Here`s something, a little tune from TreibGut, recorded in my living room with lots of fun. We are from Germany and my "studio"`s name is "Erich Klopfton Productions"

Enjoy:
 
Yeah...spinning tape and using analog mixing and processing isn't a major hit with most of the home-rec crowd 'cuz it's either too expensive, too much hassle to keep it running, and even too complicated to calibrate...etc....
....but most everyone here that uses it, has a love for it and truly enjoys that whole process which is a bit different than just sitting at a computer.

I'm with you....track to tape, dump to computer when ready. It's a nice combination.

Oh....your dropbox link craps out for me......
 
Yeah, thats why they have the Analog Only Forum. yeah drawbacks...but, Ive NEVER made a penny reselling a piece of digital gear I outgrew or replaced. But Ive almost universally made money moving up through analog gear.
 
It all comes down to what you can afford & what "deals" you can get on price, analog & / or digital, according to your budget. You can get quality used equipment in VGC but often have to wait a while beforehand. Spend your money on gear that won't lose too much on resale value, such as proper outboard instead of buying software upgrades every year for hundreds of £ or $ & having to buy another brand new computer to run it all.

Equipment such as better mics, eq's compressors & mic preamps will make more difference to your recordings than "upgrading" every year!
 
Last edited:
Is the OP around anymore? Just in case...

Bottom line is that it all depends on what's important to you. You didn't mention your budget at all, which is really the first thing we'd need to know in order to give you any real sensible advice. But I'll throw a few things out there:

The thing with analog, and I think the reason why people say it's more expensive than digital, is not only media (tape) costs and maintenance, but also the cost of outboard gear, such as effects processors and compressors, etc. Of course, you can make music without them, but it's not the norm. If you wanted to get a beginning setup, say, a 4-track cassette recorder (you didn't say whether you meant cassette or reel to reel), then you'll most likely spend about $70 minimum (I'd say) for one that's in good working order. ("Good working order" for those machines is unfortunately not nearly as common as it used to be.) Then if you wanted an FX processor (reverb, delay, etc.), you could get one for $50 let's say, and if you wanted a compressor, you could spend about the same. Add a pair of headphones ($20 Behringer ones would be perfectly fine to start) and a pair of active monitors for around $200, let's say, and you'd have a good, basic analog system that would be fun and could produce some nice sounds for the folk/indie rock style. As someone pointed out, though, you need something to mix to. If you'd want to share your music online at all, then it would really make sense to do this on a computer. You could get a used Dell or something for $50 and a used interface that would do the job perfectly well for another $50. So here are some options (all amounts are loose estimates):

Option 1: 4-track cassette
4-track cassette recorder $70
FX processor $50
Compressor (mainly for tracking) $50
Headphones $20
Monitors (speakers) $200
Old CPU (for mixdown) $50
Old interface (such as M-audio Delta or something) $50
Total $490

Option 2: Standalone digital
Used standalone digital recorder (comes with effects): $200
Headphones $20
Monitors (speakers) $200
Old CPU (for mixdown) $50
Old interface (such as M-audio Delta or something) $50
Total $520

Option 3: Reel to Reel (Most expensive by far)
Reel to Reel 4 track $200 (will very likely need some kind of maintenance or repair, which would usually require costly tools to DIY or cost to have someone do it)
Mixer $150
Tape: $50 (to get started)
FX processor $50
Compressor (mainly for tracking) $50
Headphones $20
Monitors (speakers) $200
Old CPU (for mixdown) $50
Old interface (such as M-audio Delta or something) $50
Total $820

Option 4: CPU DAW
Old used Dell CPU or something $50
Old interface (such as M-audio Delta or something) $50
Inexpensive DAW program, such as Reaper $60
(This will come with plugins for effects, and you can find lots of other freeware ones too that are perfectly decent)
Headphones $20
Monitors (speakers) $200
Total $380

Again, these are loose estimates on the price. You don't necessarily need a compressor (though they're nice to have), you could spend less ($100 or so) for a pair of monitors, and there are hidden costs such as cables, etc. (which can add up on a RTR system). I think the $820 figure for the RTR system is pretty conservative as well. It would most likely be more for a system that's fully working.

The allure of the digital systems is that they're more self-contained than analog. You have the recorder (and mixdown recorder), FX, and mixer all in one system usually. Add an interface, headphones, and speakers (and mics obviously if you need to mic anything), and you're ready to go. And the editing is obviously infinitely faster and more powerful than with analog. Analog editing may be fun, but if you plan on doing a lot of editing, then digital is really the only choice at this point.

So it all depends on your budget and your needs. I'd say if you wanted to get up and recording the quickest with the least amount of fuss and have it still be affordable, I'd go for a standalone digital recorder. You can even get a Tascam 2488 used for less than $300 now, which is a killer standalone recorder with 24 tracks, built-in FX, etc.! And you don't have to worry about interfaces and drivers, compatibility, updates, latency, etc. It's also almost guaranteed that it'll work (assuming it's advertised as such), whereas with tape machines, it's rare these days to get something that works right away. (I'm speaking from a lot of experience in this regard.)
 
FB, I think you would have to add a reverb unit to any of the analog options (figuring you could have a free plug in for DAW). I could do without a compressor more easily than I could do without reverb, unless you are blessed to have great rooms to record in already...

Depends on the style of music too I guess.
 
leddy said:
FB, I think you would have to add a reverb unit to any of the analog options (figuring you could have a free plug in for DAW). I could do without a compressor more easily than I could do without reverb, unless you are blessed to have great rooms to record in already...

Depends on the style of music too I guess.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree. I was including that with "FX processor." I was assuming it would be a multi-effect unit that had reverbs, delays, etc.
 
This is probably the #1 question asked on message boards. And like many others have said, there is no straight answer. The first question that needs to be asked is, how do you like to create? Are you a oe man band? What type of music? What do you have already? How many tracks do you record at once? After you answer that you can begin to narrow down what is best for you? Then what is your budget?

All that aside, having a bunch of experience with both sides, I can safely say the quickest way to get to "GOOD" is analog. You have to work a bit harder to get a good sound from digital. And the creative side takes longer. ive seen this in many many sessions. If your analogue equuipment is properly serviced, all you have to do is press record and off you go. Your stereo field, bass, etc is going to be much wider. But you are going to be limited in terms of editing etc. Thats why the type of music matters.

A good bridge between analog and digital is the Alesis HD 24XR. Or, if you've got the chips, the Radar system. Its intuitive like analog, sounds like analog, but can be transferred back and forth between digital seamlessly for editing etc. Anyway thats my 2c
 
ric3xrt said:
.....its still recorded to TAPE,.......the tape doesn't care if the Info(music) is converted from 1's and 0's or vibrations
Click to expand...

It certainly does.

The OP's question is "analog vs digital". Digital tape is digital recording. 1's and 0's = Digits = DigitAL. With digital tape recording, the tape is just a storage device for the converted signal the same way a hard drive is. It came about in an era where backing up computers to "tape" was the norm.

Tape may be tape, but the process of analog and digital tape recording is VERY different, as is the sound, as is the subject of this thread.
 
Last edited:
ric3xrt said:
.....its still recorded to TAPE,.......the tape doesn't care if the Info(music) is converted from 1's and 0's or vibrations
Click to expand...

The tape doesn't care but it is used differently and reacts differently.

Analog audio recorded to, and reproduced from, tape is an entirely mechanical/physical chain.
The characteristics, limitations and circumstances surrounding the use and storage, of the tape play a part in how the sound is reproduced.

Recording to digital tape is effectively no different to recording to a computer/hdd. You go through a digital conversion process and that data is stored as ones and zeros.
When the data is recalled, it is converted back to analog. The quality of the converters is important here but, excluding total read/write failure, the quality of the digital medium is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top