Digital vs. Analog

For recording, in really simplistic terms..........if you record through a console to tape, then you may have an analogue recording. Why do I say "you may"........if the sound source is an acoustic instrument, a vocalist, a drum kit or an amplified instrument (eg: a Hammond tone wheel organ, Fender Rhodes, electric guitar or bass, etc), etc., etc., and not a synth or instrument that generates it's sound from electronic circuitry, then you probably have close to an analogue recording.

If the sound is generated by electronic circuitry, "manipulated" by simulators, recorded onto digital media or ultimately to CD, etc., then you enter the digital domain.

AGAIN, this is a very simplistic explanation.

I have the "luxury" of having both 16 track digital and 16 track analogue recorders and each has it's place.............is there a difference to the ear...........most definitely but my preference is to use digital for amplified or electronic instruments and tape for acoustic sound sources (ie: vocals, drums and acoustic instruments).

But what the heck do I know...................;)

:cool:
 
ausrock said:
I have the "luxury" of having both 16 track digital and 16 track analogue recorders and each has it's place.............is there a difference to the ear...........most definitely but my preference is to use digital for amplified or electronic instruments and tape for acoustic sound sources (ie: vocals, drums and acoustic instruments).

But what the heck do I know...................;)

:cool:
Click to expand...

Having worked in both worlds, sounds like a lot! People who do analog recording seem to have a higher level of knowledge cause you don't spend that kind of money and time without knowing something.
 
The thing is, once you are dealing with equipment that has some quality to it, the equipment will not stand in the way of making a good recording/mix. All of the handwringing about particular mics, preamps, hardware, software, etc... is more about the engineer than the product.

For a quick example, I have two different kick mics, a beta 52 and a d112. They sound completely different than each other, but I can use them interchangably and still get a great kick sound that will fit the mix.

My 1176 plugins don't sound exactly like the couple of 1176's I've been lucky enough to use, but it does the same job in the same manner. In fact, if you A/B two hardware 1176's against each other you would notice differences.

The biggest difference between using hardware/software and analog/digital is the way you relate to it. That iswhat makes the biggest difference in the final product.
 
Greg_L said:
They certainly try really hard to make people think that anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, I tend to think of those guys kind of like you and amping. You know better than most one here how to mic, level inputs. Because that is what you do.

But at the basic level, most of them have an idea of what they are doing. Didn't say they were the best at it. That is different story.
 
I think most people know and understand what they really need to do to make a good recording. The basics are the basics regardless of what medium you use. The problems arise when people try to find shortcuts and workarounds instead of just doing what actually works every time. Trying to reinvent the wheel is a too common problem with home recording. I think far too many people focus on the wrong things.
 
Based on some of the discussion I've seen on the board, that is hard to argue with, but I'm there will be.
 
Grewalpalm I'll give you a somewhat helpful answer. Listening back to recordings made from analogue sources ie all music except a digital piece of equpment such as a synthesizer or drum machine I can often hear greater warmth or a fullness of tone in the sound.
Old valve radios throw a hum on the received radio signal which gives a warmth too.
There are 3 factors which come under digital: the recording, the mass production (CD,DVD,mp3 etc), and digital amplifiers connected to loudspeakers.
In recording analogue desks are still favoured except for highest end digital desks. Complaints about cheaper digital desks are they make the sound plasticky or punchy without any ambiance. I use both types of desk and generally prefer my analogue desks except for incidental sound or SFX.

There are awful analogue desks too. And for phantom power analogue desks they are going to be heavy'; they may also have a fan which will interfere with sensitive microphones in the same room.

Proof of desirability of analogue desks is shown by Sound City's Neve analogue desk which Dave Grohl now owns. Or the White Stripes specifically choosing a small London analogue studio.

When do you someone say " I really want an 80's sound on these recordings!" that was the period when all the analogue was being junked and now that digital only sound is mostly an embarrassment with the exception of a few like New Order.

On media format digital should be an outright favourite: DVD is preferable to VHS tape! But listening to a variety of 1970s-80s music on vinyl compared to CD there is variation: Black Sabbath, so far sounds better on CD, vinyl appears to have difficulty handling high volume dense metal sound during recording.
But acoustic music often sounds better on vinyl. The infamous dead clinical sound of digital does show up on many recordings eg Fleetwood Mac's The Chain.

I'd favour a GOOD analogue desk if you're going to record music or voices. A decent digital desk will likely to be cheaper, smaller and easier to move around. Unless you're working with 2 inch tape all the recording and storage will be on digital anyway
 
armourae said:
But listening to a variety of 1970s-80s music on vinyl compared to CD there is variation: Black Sabbath, so far sounds better on CD
Click to expand...
As far back as 1994, I felt the complete opposite. I remember listening to "Volume 4" and being struck with how brittle the CD sounded.
armourae said:
vinyl appears to have difficulty handling high volume dense metal sound during recording.
Click to expand...
What, on every heavy metal album recorded from 1966 through to the mid 80s ?
I have noticed for over 35 years that within both vinyl and digital domains there is a variety of quality of sound on albums, EPs and singles. Some are recorded brilliantly, others not. It's not a digital vs analog phenomena, rather it's one that has always been subject to many variables. Some engineers and mastering cats are simply better than others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top