recording using a (non-DAW) digital recorder, but using an analog console?

[ecc83]

"As yes, mixers have a sound too, and certainly tape + mixer is a big part of the sound. But digital + analog mixer does not sound like tape + mixer at all."

Certainly mixers of old may have "had a sound" (tho' DGG would never have used one!) but these days there is no excuse. Relatively easy to make a mixer that delivers 0dBu at effectively zero distortion and a headroom of +22dBu when THD might might hit 0.05%. Easy also is it to have a ruler flat frequency response 10Hz to 35kHz* and I would challenge anyone to demonstrate that such a device makes any audible difference to the signal?

Of course, there are sheds of pre amps, stand alone and in mixer channels which have 'attitude' built into them (aka "distortion") and some people rave about them. Their choice so long as they remember that once your signal has been "attituded" you cannot undo the effect.

*I despise equipment that boasts a bandwidth into the low end of the Medium Wave radio range. There has never been any good evidence that it improves audio fidelity and gives potential problems with RFI and digital hash break through.

Dave.

 

[rob aylestone]

I'd not thought about it, but with power outputs now being impressive, it is quite likely some audio systems are actually illegal. The FCC in the USD and OFCOM in the UK would certainly find even a few Watts at 198KHz could attract attention, or the odd nuclear submarine?

 

[grimtraveller]

Guys. He’s not asking “should I got use digital or tape?”, he’s asking if the digital recorder + mixer will give a similar analog sound as tape machine + mixer. The answer is no it will not. It might give a sound you like, but not the tape sound

I think this is key. The OP has stated that he doesn't want to go the computer route. And he shouldn't, because that's not the route he wants to take.
Now, it may turn out that a seed has been planted with the advice he's been given and he may eventually look into it and end up going that way some time in the future. But for now, he knows what he wants and is looking for the best way to achieve that if we can help.

 

[lonewhitefly]

"As yes, mixers have a sound too, and certainly tape + mixer is a big part of the sound. But digital + analog mixer does not sound like tape + mixer at all."

Certainly mixers of old may have "had a sound" (tho' DGG would never have used one!) but these days there is no excuse. Relatively easy to make a mixer that delivers 0dBu at effectively zero distortion and a headroom of +22dBu when THD might might hit 0.05%. Easy also is it to have a ruler flat frequency response 10Hz to 35kHz* and I would challenge anyone to demonstrate that such a device makes any audible difference to the signal?

Of course, there are sheds of pre amps, stand alone and in mixer channels which have 'attitude' built into them (aka "distortion") and some people rave about them. Their choice so long as they remember that once your signal has been "attituded" you cannot undo the effect.

*I despise equipment that boasts a bandwidth into the low end of the Medium Wave radio range. There has never been any good evidence that it improves audio fidelity and gives potential problems with RFI and digital hash break through.

Dave.

The context is wondering if the "tape sound" of a cassette 4-track can be obtained using digital + mixer. That answer is no.

But my point about the mixer is "tape + mixer" is indeed "a sound" (very many different sounds) that many people are referring to when they think "analog". Thinking you can get that from tape + digital, or mixer + digital is going to make you go through a lot of extra trouble to get there IMO.

 

[lonewhitefly]

I think this is key. The OP has stated that he doesn't want to go the computer route. And he shouldn't, because that's not the route he wants to take.
Now, it may turn out that a seed has been planted with the advice he's been given and he may eventually look into it and end up going that way some time in the future. But for now, he knows what he wants and is looking for the best way to achieve that if we can help.

Exactly. Most people in this thread seem to be answering the question they wanted him to ask: "Should I go digital?" Presumably because they want that answer to be YES ... no idea why that is the case in the Analog forum, but the world is what it is today.

Also no seed needs to be planted to encourage someone to use digital recording. Digital recording is the default in the world currently, and I would guess well over 90% of all recordings are done this way, and almost everywhere one looks they will find digital recording as the only option.