Ok .... He's entitled to his opinion I suppose. I'm never one to get hung up on the analog/digital sound debate. I'll freely admit that I'm sure I could be (and have been) fooled many times by digital emulations of analog/outboard gear. But his rant seems to be bursting at the seams with opinions stated as fact.
The first thing that caught my eye was this:
"In today's music business, at least 50% of the music that you hear on the radio was made “IDB” (In the Box - means on a DAW) with no big consoles, no tube compressors, no EQs – simply from plugins."
I'm just curious where he got this information. He may be right, but without any references, it just comes off as an opinio-fact.
Then he says this:
"These kids [making recordings at home completely ITB] are being played on airwaves and perform to sold-out crowds at some of the biggest EDM festivals in the world."
Does this mean this entire article is in reference to EDM? I have no idea who Raz is, so if this was a given, I didn't know it.
And then this chestnut:
"If money is no object and an analog studio is important to you for the experience of it (keep in mind this will have no impact on the quality of your recordings), consider hiring studio time and bringing in the producers and engineers you like."
No impact? That's a pretty big statement. I think that it's safe to say that just about everything in the studio has an impact on the quality of your recordings, especially when you consider the fact that the performances are arguably the most important aspect of a recording. And everything --- from crapping out neon lights on the ceiling to the temperature in the room to the art on the wall --- affects a musician's performance, whether it be for the better or not.
This guy doesn't seem to realize that confirmation bias is a real, measurable phenomenon. I'm not saying that you should go out and buy expensive gear just because you'll expect it to sound better, but to discount any intangibles in the recording process (such as overall vibe) is complete ignorance, IMO.
Everything along the way is part of the final product in the recording world, and that includes the work process. Some of us really don't like working ITB. We enjoy turning knobs, pushing faders, handling tape, listening to the music (instead of looking at it). Others dig the digital way and/or they don't get hung up on the working process at all. Does that mean that those who don't like the ITB process should just suck it up and do it that way? Do you think someone is likely to create great recordings if they're hating the process the entire time? (This also applies to the musicians/artists as well.)
I for one like to use analog equipment mainly for the process. It makes me happy. It really doesn't have much to do with the sound at all. As I said, I'm sure I could be fooled if someone really set out to fool me. That's why I don't even go there. I'm certain that great sounds are achievable with either (and that's been proven time and again). So it really all comes down to personal preference, which means that the author of the article is basically just saying "I like to work ITB." Great! Here, have a cookie. I have no idea why he the felt the need to attack the idea of analog with its title.