Beck said:
Cohesive – that’s exactly right. I’ve had a hard time trying to describe the collective sound that’s greater than the sum of it’s parts, which I think digital fails to preserve. I think cohesive might be the word.
Hey, guys, I'd say you are hitting right about in the 'heart of it' ... (imho) that's what makes analog to be more preferable 'method' for recording performed music. (NOTE: you see, I'm using word 'preferable' instead of 'better'. Also there are other than 'performed music' musical artforms and also productions where music is being used as supprtive entity (film, games, commercials etc), so I would not include those fields of music production into
discussion)
I also want to add here one more thing, which is also hard to clearly explain from technical point and why it matters. But, I think it is important to keep in mind, that in addition to 'being
sum of it's parts in digital domain everything (what ever is
happening) was pre-set (pre-programmed) by a designer (programmer), regardless of how complex and sophisticated the programming is.
I will try to sort of explain with following analogy/example: 2 balls plus 3 balls = 5 balls, right ? - right. How do we know?
In digital domain you get this answer only and if you first set the machine to give you the ansewer by providing the machine with hard and strict set of rules and the machine will give you the answer only by FOLLOWING YOUR RULES.
In Analog 'domain' to get the answer you have to through the balls into the air and when they 'naturally' (forced by gravity) fall down on the grass - you'll see five balls.
Now, I guess, some/many of you, guys, say: "What the hell is he talking about?" heh heh , I know, I understand that my example is kind of way out of logic and may not make much sense. But I am trying to illustrate here the sense and feeling of independence (and freedom if you will), which I get as an artist/producer, when working with analog. Another words, when working with analog, I get that feeling of doing something more personal, more unique, less predictable and clearly much more natural, and I don't have that back-feeling, that everything I do, every step on the way is predetermined by a software programmer, to whom I've learned
not to trust! 
.
well, I did my best to explain. heh heh
, sorry if my rant makes no sense...
/respects
), but at what price? You see.... this is where all the "mysteries" are comming from. From all the trickery of human brain's design (from programming, from hundreds of sets of commands and rules on how to 'manipulate the abstract data (again I highlite it: the 'rules for the machine' were written by a "collective designer/programmer", the "collective designer" has decided which switch to turn on, which switch to turn off) and from sophisticated incorporation of millions of ON/OFF-switches with electrical signal - that's what a/d and d/a really are). Yes, you get the "curve" at d/a's output door.... the question is What Curve!!!!????? When in practical application (recording performing musician, band, instrument etc) a producer hears that the "curve" comming out of "it" sucks, then that's what it is - it sucks. Sorry, man.... academia isn't fixing it, and while knowledge and understanding is nice, but it does not really help to deal with the frustration, that a practicing musician/producer is experiencing while using digital platform for recording.
Let, me put it this way (using totally ugly analogy): Digital Recording is: Fresh beef in - BigMac out. (But not the one you see on menue display!) Yeah, baby - it is still meat. Right? ... Right. - From Digital Technology Academia point - it IS Right. They can prove it to anyone with their "lab results report". For me? - nop, I ain't eating this no mo' , well, only when I really have to 
