Analog or Digital and why?

[ncmail]

I am fairly new to recording. I have been playing in bands for as far back as I can recall. My band did not have the funds to go to a studio to record so about 6 months back I picked up a Tascam portastudio DP-02 I belive, and a few Shure mics. After recording our 3 song demo I discovered I had a new hobby haha. I have since purchaced a few other things (a decent amount of mics and some cheap signal processors ect.) I really enjoy recording (myself and others) and am now wanting to persue this hobby a little harder. I am getting a decent sound with my analog set up I have now.

Is it worth going to a digital set up when I already have an anolog set up I am fairly happy with?

Is there any real advantage of digital over analog?

Why is digital the "perfered" method?

What all would I really need to purchace to do a digital set up? I have an HP labtop with Vista on it.

Please I am intrested in your set up and why you perfer either analog or digital. Pictures never hurt either ;-)

 

[miroslav]

Is it worth going to a digital set up when I already have an analog set up I am fairly happy with?
If you can get all that you desire out of your setup...there's no reason.
But I think you CAN add digital to your existing analog rig and have a hybrid setup for more options.

Is there any real advantage of digital over analog?
That's kinda vague...for some things yes but not always. If you like/need to edit...digital blows away analog. However, there's a certain sound quality to analog gear that a lot of folks simply like more than digital. It's a subjective thing.

Why is digital the "preferred" method?
It's not really preferred...it's just more common these days because you can have a fairly robust rig without shelling out thousands and thousands and thousands for the same options/features/flexibility in analog gear.


What all would I really need to purchase to do a digital set up? I have an HP laptop with Vista on it.
You need a DAW application. There's free stuff..but it doesn’t really get good until you buy something decent. You can try a very inexpensive but good DAW app ($70) like N-Track Studio (there are others) before diving into something more expensive. The more expensive apps tend to have better algorithms...aka better audio engines.

Please I am interested in your set up and why you prefer either analog or digital.
You can hit my sig links...it takes you to my studio pages. I run a hybrid analog/digital setup. I still like to track to tape...but I dump everything into the DAW for editing, then I like to come back out and mix analog using outboard, analog gear.

Oh...one of your poll choices should be "Hybrid - analog/digital".

 

[sr71rules]

You are digital...

Your DP-02 is a digital recorder.

All audio starts and ends analog. Sound waves are analog. When you mic a vocal and record it to your DP-02 it takes the analog signal and converts it to digital. The analog signal becomes 1s and 0s.

What you seem to be asking is if you should consider using a computer to record, instead of your all in one Tascam unit. The DP-02 (DP stands for Digital Portastudio) is a fine unit and unless you are being limited in your abilities by it, I wouldn't worry about making a change. If you do peruse this hobby and you find you need/want to do something that DP-02 can't do, upgrade to something else.

If you want to stay with the 'Studio in a box' concept you can get something like the Tascam 2488 unit which is similar to your DP-02 but has many more channels. You could also move into a computer based system.

Both types of workflows have pluses and minuses. If you just want a dedicated unit that will record reliably, a 'Studio in a box' is a great way to go. If you move toward a computer based system stability can be an issue with OS updates, software updates, ect, depending on how you use the recording machine. The flipside is that the computer based systems can be a lot more powerful than a 'studio in a box' system.

In terms of analog recording, that usually refers to people using reel to reel decks or the older, cassette based Portastudios. A lot of people also take a hybrid approach.

The take away is this: Don't sink money into gear for the sake of having the flashy new stuff. Spend money on gear when what you have won't let you do what you want. Do you need more tracks than the DP-02 supports? Do you need to be able to record more tracks simultaneously than the DP-02 allows? Are you looking for effects that aren't available in the DP-02? If the answer is yes, then look to upgrade. From your post, you seem happy with the DP-02; Don't fix it if it's not broken. It's easy to buy complexity that will steal the fun from you.

Hopefully I've understood what you're asking and help you along a bit...

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Is it worth going to a digital set up when I already have an anolog set up I am fairly happy with?

Define "fairly happy". What would make you "really happy"?

Is there any real advantage of digital over analog?

Yes. There are also real advantages to analog over digital. Each has their strong points and their weak points.

Your poll assumes a false dichotomy; it's not an either/or choice. Most folks in the know would prefer having a combination of analog and digital gear. Which leads to...

Why is digital the "perfered" method?

The prefered method of what? And by whom? I think you''l find a pretty even split between respondents. Some folks are solid believers in analog gear, others in digital.

In most pro studios you'll usually find a combination of both. Quality analog has a sound that is unbeatable and not quite reproducible in digital, but digital has editing, speed and flexibility capabilities at relatively low cost that can't be matched in analog alone.

What all would I really need to purchace to do a digital set up?

A halfway decent interface. This is basically a box that takes line in and mic in (and sometimes instrument in), has the preamps and phantom power to handle most mics, and the A/D converters to automatically convert the analog inputs to digital, outputting the results via USB, firewire or S/PDIF, with the other end going into your computer. These boxes come in a number of sizes, with two channels being the entry level size and 8 channels being the other most common size. The recording/editing/mixing software for your computer usually comes with the interface at no extra charge.

G.

 

[dodgeaspen]

This can open up a can of?????? Yes analog is better. It is proven to have a wider range of dynamics ETC ETC. It is easy to use despite what the digital people say. Digital has advantages, it is more convenient to use in a small setting and cutting and pasting is simple. IMO it can take away from the natural feel of the music. Everything is so mechanical feeling these days. I have to laugh when I see pics of studios that have expensive consoles and in the middle they have a stupid computer screen. It looks like an electronic bobble head.
I think that last sentence should earn me a few rep points!!!!!

 

[VESSEL2020]

It looks like an electronic bobble head.
I think that last sentence should earn me a few rep points!!!!!

I'd give you some more rep,..but it says I have to spread some more around before givin' it to ya again!

 

[dodgeaspen]

I'd give you some more rep,..but it says I have to spread some more around before givin' it to ya again!

Thanks anyway.

 

[noisewreck]

Stupid title for a thread.

It's not analog OR digital. It should be analog AND digital.

This stupid debate is really stupid and overdone.

 

[ncmail]

If you can get all that you desire out of your setup...there's no reason.
But I think you CAN add digital to your existing analog rig and have a hybrid setup for more options.

If you like/need to edit...digital blows away analog.

My set up makes me faily happy. The things I am not happy with is I can only do two tracks at once....which is fine most of the time. But I am finding with drums alot of times I want to tweak things a little bit from the original mix I did on the mixer and have no way to do this without retracking everything I have already done.

As far as I hybrid set up. Would this only be able to be used for editing or tracking as well? And one more thing while I am thinking about it. As far as editing...is there a way with what I have now to add effects to individual tracks (like adding different compression to seperate tracks) or can I only do the "effects loop" and have a "generic" effects set up to use?

Your DP-02 is a digital recorder.

All audio starts and ends analog. Sound waves are analog. When you mic a vocal and record it to your DP-02 it takes the analog signal and converts it to digital. The analog signal becomes 1s and 0s.

The DP-02 (DP stands for Digital Portastudio) is a fine unit and unless you are being limited in your abilities by it, I wouldn't worry about making a change. If you do peruse this hobby and you find you need/want to do something that DP-02 can't do, upgrade to something else.

you can get something like the Tascam 2488 unit which is similar to your DP-02 but has many more channels.

Do you need more tracks than the DP-02 supports? Do you need to be able to record more tracks simultaneously than the DP-02 allows? Are you looking for effects that aren't available in the DP-02? If the answer is yes, then look to upgrade. From your post, you seem happy with the DP-02; Don't fix it if it's not broken. It's easy to buy complexity that will steal the fun from you.

I did not know that, sorry I was confused on what was digital then

As far as tracks, I could use more, I find my self scratching a bunch of cool ideas for supporting vocal tracks and extra guitar tracks to not exceed my track limits.

Stupid title for a thread.

It's not analog OR digital. It should be analog AND digital.

This stupid debate is really stupid and overdone.

Sorry guess not everyone is perfect like you and if its so stupid why even bother posting haha...wow

 

[Guitargodgt]

You forgot the all of the above option. I don't even know how to answer the poll because non of the options work.

 

[ncmail]

I have another question to throw at you guys. For editing, or mastering, can (and how do I) import the tracks to my labtop and edit them? And what are some good programs for that? I have heard alot of talk about Reaper lately. Is that able to edit with EQ, and comp and all that good stuff? And would I need an interface to do this? I know stupid questions, Im young and learning

 

[miroslav]

So what do you record to now...tape?...or standalone digital "porta" box?

What format is the recorded music in?

 

[mshilarious]

This can open up a can of?????? Yes analog is better. It is proven to have a wider range of dynamics ETC ETC.

That is false; there is no tape deck with 120dB dynamic range, nor flat response from 20Hz (or lower) to 40kHz (or higher). This is not difficult for digital.

 

[Lance Lawson]

Analog vs digital? Good analog is still better than good digital. Poor analog can sound worse than poor digital. Great analog is unbeatable and will remain so for the time being. Digital is so popular because of the ease with which it can be edited and manipulated. Digital is nearly universal since all PC's and Mac's come with sound now. Digital is cheap to make and easy to use. I prefer analog sound and my recordings these days are utilizing both digital and analog. Analog is making somewhat of a comeback lately which says something about how fine it truly is.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I have another question to throw at you guys. For editing, or mastering, can (and how do I) import the tracks to my labtop and edit them? And what are some good programs for that? I have heard alot of talk about Reaper lately. Is that able to edit with EQ, and comp and all that good stuff? And would I need an interface to do this? I know stupid questions, Im young and learning

As far as getting stuff into your computer, if you mean from your DP-02, it has USB 2.0 connectivity for just that purpose. If you mean without your DP-02, one of those interfaces I described in my last post will do it.

If you can swing it, if I were you I'd eventually sell the DP-02 and use the money towards a decent interface. The DP-02 is a fine starter machine and great for portability and size constraints, but if you're going to incorporate a computer -based DAW, you''l not only soon find much of what the DP-02 does as redundant, but find the 16-bit format restrictive (you'll want to be working in 24-bit once on the DAW) and the 16-bit-result A/D converters in the 02 as somewhat inferior to the 24-bit-result converters in the interface (assuming you get a halfway decent one.)

I wouldn't worry all that much about the brand of DAW software you get; they all work fine and more-or-less the same, with some cosmetic and workflow differences, but nothing that would mean much to a newb with no previous preferences. If you want to work with your DP-02, yeah, Reaper is fine. Even cheaper would be Audacity, which is free. If you get an interface, it'll usually come with brand-name DAW software (e.g. Cubase LE is just one example) that'll work just fine for you.

G.

 

[miroslav]

So what do you record to now...tape?...or standalone digital "porta" box?

What format is the recorded music in?

DUH!

Sorry, I thought this was a different thread when I typed that...and forgot it was already established you have a digital DP-02 box.

 

[dodgeaspen]

That is false; there is no tape deck with 120dB dynamic range, nor flat response from 20Hz (or lower) to 40kHz (or higher). This is not difficult for digital.

Sure, not difficult at all if your into shrill, sterile, and ear piercing sounds. 1 question I'll ask, if digital is soooooooooo good why do people desperately seek plugins that mirror analog? Since you have so many posts under your belt I ask you oh most wise one.

 

[sr71rules]

Do we have to do this here?

Do we have to have another argument about Analog versus Digital? Really?

The original poster on this thread was not trying to kick off a troll war and was frankly confused. His question was actually about using a 'Studio in a Box' unit or/versus a computer to record audio with.

The poster was asking some basic questions and, had you read that post, it would be clear that he wasn't looking to kick off a conversation about analog tape versus digital.

Can we please move past all this garbage and get back to questions ncmail is asking?

 

[Chibi Nappa]

It's pretty basic:

"Regular person" analog sounds kinda' bad. (cassette tapes, inexpensive turntables)
High end analog sounds amazing.
Digital is affordable and easy to use.


Do you have $500,000 laying around, a trained maintenance staff, and deal with bands that can blow your doors off without endless edits and tweaks? Get an analog setup.

Do you not have $500,000 laying around, have no idea how to calibrate your own ass let alone a 2-inch tape deck, and deal with bands that require sample replacement and nudging onto a grid? Get a digital setup.


In analog world a single compressor that you can use on a single track at mix time will run about $1500. In digital world $500 gets you a plugin that runs on as many tracks as you need.

In analog world a tape costs about $100. In digital world you shake a tree and get buried under the avalanche of available hard drive storage that falls out.

In analog world every time your drummer fucks up you bust out a razor blade, cut physical tape, and pray to God that the damn blade wasn't magnetized and the cut was in the right location. In digital world every time your drummer fucks up you drag a nice clear visible wave form with your mouse.

It goes on and on.

There is no question that analog sounds better. Much better. There is also no question that it is expensive and less practical. Many people these days record digital and then sum analog. Take your digital outs and run them to a summing box. I run mine to a full analog console. Some people use a dedicated summing box like the Dangerous 2-bus.

 

[grimtraveller]

Do we have to have another argument about Analog versus Digital? Really?

The original poster on this thread was not trying to kick off a troll war and was frankly confused. His question was actually about using a 'Studio in a Box' unit or/versus a computer to record audio with.

The poster was asking some basic questions and, had you read that post, it would be clear that he wasn't looking to kick off a conversation about analog tape versus digital.

Can we please move past all this garbage and get back to questions ncmail is asking?

Is it worth going to a digital set up when I already have an anolog set up I am fairly happy with?

Is there any real advantage of digital over analog?

Why is digital the "perfered" method?

What all would I really need to purchace to do a digital set up? I have an HP labtop with Vista on it.

Please I am intrested in your set up and why you perfer either analog or digital.

Actually, the OP's questions can really easilly be interpreted as precisely kicking off a conversation about analog verses digital. If you ask whether or not you should switch to digital even though you're fairly happy with your perceived analog set up, you are asking for the merits of one over the other. If you ask people why they prefer analog or digital, it's virtually impossible to not get into why one is better than the other in the opinion of those posting answers.