I grew up learning on analog gear, but I love computer recording and won't look back.
The main thing is, I don't have the ears to hear the difference of a signal recorded into my computer, and the playback.
And furthermore, I am amazed at all the people with faaaaaar less recording time "under their belt" than I have, that hear all these fine "details." But, I don't claim to have the best analytical ear either. Although I place my ears ability highest on my food chain...above musicianship, writing, recording skills...etc.
Admittedly, there is nothing cooler looking (in a studio) than some 10.5" reels turning and some analog meters bouncing away. But I only hear the difference on a high end machine like a MCI, Studer, Ampex, etc... and NOT on the consumer stuff that hobbiests are grabbing up like hotcakes. Personally, I think there is a much bigger difference between a Studer and a 1/2" Tascam than people admit. Even though tape width may end up being the same, (1/2" 8 track -2" 24 track)the electronics are certainly not. And that said, from PERSONAL experience, I think a 24bit computer recording makes a (consumer)Tascam machine pale in comparision.
And honestly, I don't find the people raving about analog in the HOME RECORDING FORUMS, having the skills that it really makes that much difference anyway. They suffer from things like bad mic technique, poor musicianship, inadequate monitoring chains, lousy preamps, etc etc. These things are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more important in having these skills/equipment rather than what medium they are recording to.
