Would you do analog recording ?

[grimtraveller]

For those that record digitally, would you ever consider recording on analog recorders if they were freely available ?
And for those that made the change to digital, would you ever go back to analog ?
Do you think that the evolution of digital recording and it's tools have brought about a different kind of musician and engineer than the one that existed pre~digital ?
The thoughts of those with hybrid set ups and those that don't record digitally are more than welcome.

 

[DM60]

If I had the space, I would love to record analog. I think the logistics alone would make you record with more of a plan and be better prepared. Let's face it, making edits in analog is more complex than in digital, therefore making each take important.

Plus, I just think doing analog recording would be a good learning experience.

 

[jigfresh]

I would say No. I'm interested in too many things in life to do things the hard way or old fashioned way. I'm sure my attitude pisses off purists, 'these new kids and their lack of respect for the past'. I want fast, easy, cheap. I'd like to have a home studio I can put in a backpack. And one that costs very little so I can still go to Europe this summer... and next. I don't want recurring costs for tape or space for all the equipment. My house is very small. Plus I'm sure my cats would love messing with the tape. They don't bother with the lights on the interface. And as for sound quality, my ear sucks, so it doesn't bother me if the stuff I record sounds perfect. I don't play that well anyways. Wouldn't want to waste tape on my bad playing, and I don't really want to record anyone else.

I guess you said 'if they were freely available' so even leaving out the money part, I'd rather invest the time and physical space to something else.

 

[kip4]

I own and use analogue in a small way (redox A77) and love it. I would definitely record analogue and no qualms.
I think both mediums have their strengths and weaknesses, so I like the flexibility of a hybrid set up even if only in a small way.

 

[Seafroggys]

Maybe, maybe not.

I grew up with computers and digital tech long before I got into recording, so the integration into DAW's and that workflow was very, very easy for me. I've always embraced digital tech over other mediums. I remember first getting Photoshop in 97 and thought that it was so cool I could make advanced graphics on the computer that trumped anything that I could hand draw.

Doing something on tape could be cool for curiosity's sake, but to me, digital based recording is just about superior in everyway.

 

[jimmys69]

I would say yes to a hybrid approach. Not willing to spend the time or money for it anytime soon though...

I have a friend/client that records to 2" tape, then sends the tracks to me for editing/mixing. Well, I don't hear anything special from his recordings to tape. In fact, I end up adding VST's to make it sound better. He is not necessarily one I would call super experienced, but if he feels it adds warmth or whatever to his tracks, then it does for him. I am ok with that.

Maybe when I retire at like 85, and my gear investment is 1,000 times my age?

PS. If that 1% of 'real' tape saturation goodness is worth it to anyone, then go for it. I personally do not hear it. But I am just some guy that is happy with what I have now. Though, there is that other thing I want, and the other things that I need. Likely a few thousand of goodies I will buy after tax return. Then more and more...

 

[mdainsd]

For those that record digitally, would you ever consider recording on analog recorders if they were freely available ? I record on both analog and digital mediums. I started decades ago with all analog (obviously). I left music for many years. When I came back to it I built up a digital rig. I learned it and started recording, but something was missing. I figured out I was longing for the old school way, sounds, smells, workflow, all of it. So I then built my all analog studio. I now use both, but for different purposes.

And for those that made the change to digital, would you ever go back to analog ? Already answered, yes.

Do you think that the evolution of digital recording and it's tools have brought about a different kind of musician and engineer than the one that existed pre~digital ? Most definitely. Its made for some lazy musicians that need only get a small part of a song less than stellarly recorded, then "fix" it in the computer and use cut and paste to finish. Digital has allowed anyone to "produce" music, but most of them shouldnt, just my opinion. One need only turn on the radio to hear the digitally produced auto-tuned lifeless rubbish that floods the airways, again just one person's opinion.


The thoughts of those with hybrid set ups and those that don't record digitally are more than welcome. Hybrid is a gimmick, as far as Im concerned to WOW! potential customers, with the whole "we track everything to tape" deal. Whatever may have been captured by using tape is lost once its in the box and being "fixed".

 

[ashcat_lt]

If I was paid to do it, and it was what the client wanted, and they paid for rental of the equipment and a qualified tape op to run it (I've never touched reel-to-reel), then by all means!

 

[John Willett]

For those that record digitally, would you ever consider recording on analog recorders if they were freely available ?
And for those that made the change to digital, would you ever go back to analog ?
Do you think that the evolution of digital recording and it's tools have brought about a different kind of musician and engineer than the one that existed pre~digital ?
The thoughts of those with hybrid set ups and those that don't record digitally are more than welcome.

Absolutely NOT !

I switched to digital recording in 1983 and would never want to go back to the horrible days of analogue tape with all the distortion is has - wow and flutter, modulation noise, hiss, noise build-up every time you copy, lack of top end, bias noise, print through, tape stretch, etc., etc., etc...

And this does not include all the regular maintenance required - setting bias, azimuth, Dolby level, head cleaning, demagnetisation, etc., etc., etc...

A piano never really sounds like a piano on analogue tape, it does on digital.

BUT - digital recording does show up deficiencies in microphones, and other equipment and technique that can be hidden by recording on analogue tape - so you have to take care...

I would never want to record on analogue tape again - horrible stuff.

 

[dainbramage]

I switched to digital recording in 1983

Did you record on a Commodore 64?

 

[samurai]

Absolutely NOT !

I switched to digital recording in 1983 and would never want to go back to the horrible days of analogue tape with all the distortion is has - wow and flutter, modulation noise, hiss, noise build-up every time you copy, lack of top end, bias noise, print through, tape stretch, etc., etc., etc...

And this does not include all the regular maintenance required - setting bias, azimuth, Dolby level, head cleaning, demagnetisation, etc., etc., etc...

A piano never really sounds like a piano on analogue tape, it does on digital.

BUT - digital recording does show up deficiencies in microphones, and other equipment and technique that can be hidden by recording on analogue tape - so you have to take care...

I would never want to record on analogue tape again - horrible stuff.

Those were the days! When men were real men!
Funnily enough I'm going try a bit of analogue recording this weekend while I'm waiting to get the kit I need to set my digital kit! Should be fun!

 

[gecko zzed]

No . . . I wouldn't go back to analog. John Willett summed up my views exactly.

 

[miroslav]

Oh those horrible analog days!!!



I still record to analog tape and mix out through an analog console with analog outboard gear....but I also use my DAW and I playback from the DAW when I mix out to analog.

I think the people who have never really recorded with a decent analog setup don't have a clear idea of what a more serious analog recording rig entails or how it sounds or can sound….in order to properly answer the OP questions about wanting to go to analog.
There are a lot of newbs who think ANYTHING that is technically an analog piece of gear instead of digital...automatically has some magical property and that using any of it means you're "recording with analog".

I say that with the perspective that my own analog setup is still not anywhere near as good as it can be.

This is NOT in any way about me hating on digital or any of that nonsense (as I said, I use it all the time)....but analog recording does sound REALLY good under the right circumstances, and for me it's not a question of switching to or going back to analog....it's about continuing to record/mix with analog gear well into to future right alongside my digital gear.

The problem with the OP concept is that if you are not already well involved with a decent analog rig....thinking about getting into one or going back to one is not simple to com[rehedn these days, because the tape decks are far and few between, and the really good analog outboard gear costs more per piece than what some folks here spend on their entire digital "studio". Not to mention....yes, analog tape decks reqiure more than just pressing a mouse button to make them work...and there has to be a commitment and love for that....so it's not for everyone. Some folks don't want to or can't deal with that much commitment to the gear.
So for many, it's like asking them would they ever build a rocket to Mars if they had the opportunity.....I mean, it's just not something they can answer with true understanding of what it would take.

 

[miroslav]

Absolutely NOT !

I switched to digital recording in 1983.....

.........

I would never want to record on analogue tape again - horrible stuff.

C'mon John.....digital sounded "better" back in 1983...?


Of course....it also has to do with the type of music you are recording.
For classical piano, the preference may certainly not be the same as for Rock or what have you.
Even today....when they want that "Rock" sound (not the new digitally homogenized "Metal" sound), analog tape wins out every time in the pro arena where quality tape and analog gear still exist plentifully. Not to mention….there’s be a resurgence of “analog” recording in the Rock/Pop and even Hip Hop/Rap world.

 

[grimtraveller]

There are a lot of newbs who think ANYTHING that is technically an analog piece of gear instead of digital...automatically has some magical property and that using any of it means you're "recording with analog".

Which is why I was very specific in asking as part of the OP

For those that record digitally, would you ever consider recording on analog recorders if they were freely available ?

thinking about getting into one or going back to one is not simple to comprehend these days, because the tape decks are far and few between, and the really good analog outboard gear costs more per piece than what some folks here spend on their entire digital "studio". Not to mention....yes, analog tape decks reqiure more than just pressing a mouse button to make them work...and there has to be a commitment and love for that....so it's not for everyone. Some folks don't want to or can't deal with that much commitment to the gear.

Hence the

if they were freely available

part of the OP.
On the other hand, both John W and Gekko did used to record with analogue. Many of us that started 'back in the day' only had analog equipment at our disposal. Some have stayed with it, others haven't, some have gone for a hybrid. In my mind, that makes for a more interesting basis for discussion than the usual analog v digital war.

So for many, it's like asking them would they ever build a rocket to Mars if they had the opportunity.....I mean, it's just not something they can answer with true understanding of what it would take.

I can answer that easilly ~ I wouldn't build a rocket to Mars even if I had the opportunity because neither flying through space or travelling to distant hunks of freezing or watery or moulten lumps of rock millions of miles away that take years to reach is of any interest to me.
But a number of people are interested in different aspects of recording and might have thought about the merits and demerits of the two mediums. And some of those may be fairly new to recording. In a way, many of us that started off with cassette based portastudios faced similar things when starting out. At that time, it was the various reel to reels v cassettes.
These indeed might be daft questions but they'll only really be daft to those that think they're daft.

 

[John Willett]

Did you record on a Commodore 64?

No - I have never recorded on a computer.

My first digital recording was in 1982 on a Sony PCM-F1 with SL-F1 Betamax transport.

I bought the PCM-Fi system in 1983 and that was my main digital recorder for 10-years.

I went DAT in the early 1990s with a pair of Fostex D10 recorders.

I bought the Fostex FR-2 24-bit machine when that came out and upgraded to the Nagra VI in 2007 when it first came out.

In 2012 I bought the AETA 4MinX recorder.

All my recording has been on dedicated digital recorders and I only use a computer for editing (I use Sequoia).

 

[miroslav]

These indeed might be daft questions but they'll only really be daft to those that think they're daft.

Well you know....when I started with analog tape recording, back in the mid-'70s....it was on a 1/4" 4-track with a small TASCAM mixer and a handful of mics and minimal outboard gear.
I would NEVER EVER call that serious "analog recording". So for anyone to use that as part of their decision making, is pointless.

Unless you qualify what you mean by "analog recording" and at what caliber....asking people's opinions will
just produce all kinds of unqualified answers.
Someone who use to only ever record in "analog" on a 4-track cassette portastudio (some still do) with minimal analog outboard gear...and then moved on to a 150 channel DAW with a gazillion plugs and apps.....is not going to give a qualified answer about "analog recording" when you consider the more upper end of the analog spectrum and how it sounds and what it offers.

It's got nothing to do with any kind if "snooty".......it's just a fact.
It's like asking someone who only ever used a rowboat, what they think about sailboat racing.

 

[John Willett]

C'mon John.....digital sounded "better" back in 1983...?

Absolutely - very much better.

You can hear the difference very clearly.

However, some people like all the horrible distortions that analogue tape has - so, if you like it, do it - but it *is* distortion and a good digital recording is far more accurate.

I hated analogue print-through where the recording printed itself through several layers of tape - record a single note and you hear it repeating about 5 or 6 times before the recording reaches the replay head and then another 5 or 6 times after it has passed. Just due to self-printing through the layers of tape.

And it was EXPENSIVE! Back in the early 1980s a 10½" NAB reel of ¼" tape cost £12 - £15 a reel. That's equivalent to about £50 - £80 in value today. That reel had a recording time of half an hour at 15ips, or an hour if you recorded at 7½ips. So, a single recording could cost several hundred pounds in tape alone. And I NEVER reused tape - I used virgin tape every time for a recording.

Same when I went digital - it was always a brand new virgin tape for all recordings.

It wasn't cheap.

Also, my first digital recorder cost me the equivalent of 3-months wages at the time - to put it all in perspective.

Oh - my analogue recorders were first a Tandberg 3321X and I later upgraded to a Teac A7300-2T (both I still have), but I stopped using the Teac seriously in 1983 (and the Teac was two to three months wages when I bought it).

 

[miroslav]

Sorry John.....but you obviously are very biased in your views, and that's fine....but there are MANY people at pro levels, who still use tape and analog, and who think that for some types of music, analog just sounds better....so all his "horrible sounding" stuff you're tossing out is a little, well.... over the top, IMHO... ...and what leads to so many silly analog VS digital arguments, rather than more objective discussions.

Just one simple example....most of the best drum sample libraries are tracked.....to tape with analog gear.
Why...?
Because they just sound better that way.

 

[John Willett]

Sorry John.....but you obviously are very biased in your views, and that's fine....but there are MANY people at pro levels, who still use tape and analog, and who think that for some types of music, analog just sounds better....so all his "horrible sounding" stuff you're tossing out is a little, well.... over the top, IMHO... ...and what leads to so many silly analog VS digital arguments, rather than more objective discussions.

Just one simple example....most of the best drum sample libraries are tracked.....to tape with analog gear.
Why...?
Because they just sound better that way.

"Biased" is the wrong word to use.

Yes, it's my opinion based on many years of use of both systems.

This is not to do with analogue vs. digital per se, but about analogue *tape* recording.

It is true that analogue tape has lots of distortions and I listed some of them - I also said that some people *like* these distortions.

Yes, I supposed I did go a little OTT saying "horrible", but that is my experience in recording classical music and wanting to get as close to the real thing as possible.

Sounding "better" as you say - I'm not sure that "better" is a good word either, as the sound is distorted compared to the original. But it *is* true to say that some analogue recordings made like this can be more "pleasing" to the ear.

You use the tools you want to get the result you want.

If you really want a good analogue tape sound, it may be a good idea to record on tape and then take the output of the replay head direct to a DAW. This way you get all the characteristics of the analogue tape sound, but without any print-through, as you take the signal off the tape before any print-through occurs.

Oh - I forgot to mention tape compression - this is a distortion that many people like.

Just like a guitarist often winds it all up into distortion because that is the sound he (she) wants - recording on analogue tape is a distortion that many people like.

I was not decrying analogue recording - other than I would never want to go back to it - but many people do not realise the expense and hard work that analogue tape recording requires - ie: regular cleaning of the machine and heads before every recording, regular checking and alignment of tape heads and path, checking azimuth, lining up the machine, setting bias for each batch of tape used, etc., etc., etc...

Oh - and I was recording exclusively analogue for about 10 years or so before I went digital, so am well acquainted with the foibles of both systems.