Ronan
New member
xstatic said:
I have agreed with almost everything you have said except this. There is doubt, at least with this old dinosaur.
I have agreed with almost everything you have said except this. There is doubt, at least with this old dinosaur.
X
xstatic
New member
That statement may have been a little bold in my quest to defend analog longevity. The one thing I do like about digital, is that it really allows you buy just what you can afford, and then slowly add on a later dates as it can be afforded.
What ould be really cool is if you could buy a 2" 24 track for like $1000 with just four tracks, and then add tracks later at some sort of fixed cost
What ould be really cool is if you could buy a 2" 24 track for like $1000 with just four tracks, and then add tracks later at some sort of fixed cost
M
Mr Nice
New member
I would have to co-sign that using digital is more flexible than analog. Digital has far more editing features and can allow you to create at a rapid rate. There are plug-ins that simulate an analog vibe now-a-days, but if you really want that true analog warmth you can always track/mix digitally and then record the 2 track master onto an anlog tape. But still the price of using a DAW compared to a 2" RTR is a huge gap. And you can get more done with a DAW.
A lot of the old timers are set in their ways as far as choosing analog. i myself do like the sound of an analog tape but I cant afford that kind of system right now. And it does seem that even the big studio's rarely use analog RTR's anymore.
A lot of the old timers are set in their ways as far as choosing analog. i myself do like the sound of an analog tape but I cant afford that kind of system right now. And it does seem that even the big studio's rarely use analog RTR's anymore.
M
manning1
Banned
cloneboy....you said....
"I think the rising quality of digital, the sheer convenience, the power, and ultimately the cheaper costs due to not having to buy analog tape, that analog will get wiped out in the professional sense. Especially when the new up and coming engineers have never even SEEN a RTR analog much less how to work on one..." etc etc.
that has got to be one of the most insightfull posts ive seen in a long while.
kudos to you.
i think whats really going to make the analog cookie crumble is when the computers become powerfull enough to emulate PROPERLY the sound of old studers, ampexes, and scullys etc etc. you can start to see this happening with things like the free SIR reverb with the capability to model impulses of
certain desirable mic pre's. i know maybe its in its infancy and not perfect..
but the battlelines are starting to appear in the sand. like others on here i TOO still love a nice big studer multitrack , maybe i'm a romantic.
i also conveniently forget about all the servicing hassles. for me - digital has won me over i'm afraid. great post cloneboy.
"I think the rising quality of digital, the sheer convenience, the power, and ultimately the cheaper costs due to not having to buy analog tape, that analog will get wiped out in the professional sense. Especially when the new up and coming engineers have never even SEEN a RTR analog much less how to work on one..." etc etc.
that has got to be one of the most insightfull posts ive seen in a long while.
kudos to you.
i think whats really going to make the analog cookie crumble is when the computers become powerfull enough to emulate PROPERLY the sound of old studers, ampexes, and scullys etc etc. you can start to see this happening with things like the free SIR reverb with the capability to model impulses of
certain desirable mic pre's. i know maybe its in its infancy and not perfect..
but the battlelines are starting to appear in the sand. like others on here i TOO still love a nice big studer multitrack , maybe i'm a romantic.
i also conveniently forget about all the servicing hassles. for me - digital has won me over i'm afraid. great post cloneboy.
R
Reel Recording
New member
Hi, this is my first post here, even though I have been lurking on this site for a very long time.
As far as this thread goes, cloneboy has said exactly how I feel. My studio has a 2 " 24, a 1" MS-16, a 1/2 " fostex 16, 5 adats, and a pc with Sonar 4. My preference of course is the Otari 24, but the cost of tape is prohibitive. The most used deck in my studio is the MS-16, because of the relative low price of tape, and the cost/quality ratio.I do a hybrid thing, sometimes I'll dump it to Sonar for editing, sometimes go back, sometimes not. Its what the client can afford. The computer is the cheapest way to go, and like someone said, for bands haven't a lot of money, or that can't really play very well, you can go a long way to make an amateur sound like a pro. But as far as just the pure sound of it, I'll take analog every time, there is no argument from me there.
Also, if you are like me, all you do is spend all of your money on gear anyway and never throw anything away... I'm glad I've still got my adats! They still come in handy.
There is also the fact that many new musicians can't even tell the difference between a cd and an mp3...as long as everything is compressed beyond pain its all they want...
As far as this thread goes, cloneboy has said exactly how I feel. My studio has a 2 " 24, a 1" MS-16, a 1/2 " fostex 16, 5 adats, and a pc with Sonar 4. My preference of course is the Otari 24, but the cost of tape is prohibitive. The most used deck in my studio is the MS-16, because of the relative low price of tape, and the cost/quality ratio.I do a hybrid thing, sometimes I'll dump it to Sonar for editing, sometimes go back, sometimes not. Its what the client can afford. The computer is the cheapest way to go, and like someone said, for bands haven't a lot of money, or that can't really play very well, you can go a long way to make an amateur sound like a pro. But as far as just the pure sound of it, I'll take analog every time, there is no argument from me there.
Also, if you are like me, all you do is spend all of your money on gear anyway and never throw anything away... I'm glad I've still got my adats! They still come in handy.
There is also the fact that many new musicians can't even tell the difference between a cd and an mp3...as long as everything is compressed beyond pain its all they want...
Ronan
New member
xstatic said:What ould be really cool is if you could buy a 2" 24 track for like $1000 with just four tracks, and then add tracks later at some sort of fixed cost
A pal of mine just boght a Otari MTR90-II 2 inch 24 track for $1500 in decent condition.
Ronan
New member
This seems a little counter intuitive, but if I am doing a straight ahead rock, pop, folk or jazz records I actually find all analog records tend to go faster than than DAW based records. I bounce back and forth all the time and have been making DAW based records for over a decade so its not a matter of being a Dinosaur that can not adapt.
This of course assumes that the musicians can actually play, but I do not have much interstest in working with musicians that can not play their instruments. If I am doing an electronic based or slick pop record that is a different story.
This of course assumes that the musicians can actually play, but I do not have much interstest in working with musicians that can not play their instruments. If I am doing an electronic based or slick pop record that is a different story.
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
I recently did an informal survey of a number of musicians in the area about what type of recording medium they would want to record on. This was part of the research for my studio business plan. In general I found that:
-In general, younger kids want to be on digital because it's "high tech" and they understand that more
-There is a small percentage that want to be "lo-fi" and record to analog, not realizing it's the higher fidelity option. These types tend to collect vinyl as well.
-Bands recorded on digital tend to want to be recorded on digital because they know their mistakes can be fixed easier
-People interested in recording to analog are often deterred as soon as you bring up the additional costs for tape and time required
-Older or better bands will tend to prefer analog if they had bad experiences with digital
-People with more money available care about sound quality more and will pay to get the best product possible
-Rappers don't understand the question, but like shiny, sleek, high tech looking equipment that screams bling
-Bands with one home recordist or more in the mix will often want to use tools they can't afford to use, often this is analog tape front end flown into a DAW
CONCLUSION:
If possible have both formats available. Even if you are 100% digital you can make a strong argument for picking up a 2 track analog machine like an Otari MTR for mixdown.
It is a huge liability to be 100% analog unless you are working with a particular client base. Studios that start out as total analog are at a huge disadvantage.
If you are a pro studio, not having analog is a huge disadvantage. Bands with big money and whose careers depend on the sound of their album may not come to you.
-In general, younger kids want to be on digital because it's "high tech" and they understand that more
-There is a small percentage that want to be "lo-fi" and record to analog, not realizing it's the higher fidelity option. These types tend to collect vinyl as well.
-Bands recorded on digital tend to want to be recorded on digital because they know their mistakes can be fixed easier
-People interested in recording to analog are often deterred as soon as you bring up the additional costs for tape and time required
-Older or better bands will tend to prefer analog if they had bad experiences with digital
-People with more money available care about sound quality more and will pay to get the best product possible
-Rappers don't understand the question, but like shiny, sleek, high tech looking equipment that screams bling
-Bands with one home recordist or more in the mix will often want to use tools they can't afford to use, often this is analog tape front end flown into a DAW
CONCLUSION:
If possible have both formats available. Even if you are 100% digital you can make a strong argument for picking up a 2 track analog machine like an Otari MTR for mixdown.
It is a huge liability to be 100% analog unless you are working with a particular client base. Studios that start out as total analog are at a huge disadvantage.
If you are a pro studio, not having analog is a huge disadvantage. Bands with big money and whose careers depend on the sound of their album may not come to you.
X
xstatic
New member
"A lot of the old timers are set in their ways as far as choosing analog"
Since when did choosing the best possible sound become "set in their ways" ?
Just because guitar center doesn't sell analog multitracks doesn't mean it will go away. There will always be a place for analog in the studio industry. This is because there will always be both musicians and engineers who care enough to check it out.
Since when did choosing the best possible sound become "set in their ways" ?
Just because guitar center doesn't sell analog multitracks doesn't mean it will go away. There will always be a place for analog in the studio industry. This is because there will always be both musicians and engineers who care enough to check it out.
C
Cloneboy Studio
.
xstatic said:
Except one day digital will EXCEED analog in sonic fidelity for both pure sound recordings, "big" sound, and "analog tape" sounds.
I mean, it may take 128 bit/3072 mhz recording standards, but one day it will happen.
Honestly, digital is already more pure than analog. The sound of analog is NOT the true sound of the recording at all. You have to deal with the possibility that analog may sound like crap, but we've ADAPTED to that sound over decades and decades of familiarity.
Brace yourself for the day that digital conversion occurs *before* the preamp because it sounds better... and that you can go from a Neve modeled pre to an API or Great River sound at the click of a button.
M
Mr Nice
New member
xstatic said:
To say "choosing the best possible sound" is only an opinion! Yeah, analog gives you a warmer sound but that doesnt mean its the "best possible sound". It depends on the user at hand. I like the warm sound of analog, but I prefer and think that clarity and the pristine sound of digital is better.
And when I say "set in their ways" meant as they wont change not because analog sounds better its because they are used to the procedures. Kind of like how the "older" medical doctors are more biased to using "older" healing techniques as opposed to newer methods.
R
Reel Recording
New member
I have a local band that I recorded that has sold over 5,000 cds. I could not have done it without digital. I tried to track these guys on 2" 24 , but they could not play a single song all the way through without major error or tempo variation. They could never do the same arrangement twice! The singer can't sing in key, and the guitar players are sketchy at best. These guys couldn't even keep their guitars in tune...Thanks to digital I glued a cd together that sounds fantastic. These guys are pretty much terrible, but you would never know it by what we put together. The cd received rave reviews! There is simply no way I could have done it straight analog. So, in this case, what is better? a good sounding cd of an atrocious band, or a clean sounding cd of a band that sounds like they are good?
The bottom line- they are customers and they are paying you. You have to do the best you can to make it sound good. It just makes me wonder -how many bands on the radio are just rich kids with limited talent, and a killer pro tools studio at their disposal ?
The bottom line- they are customers and they are paying you. You have to do the best you can to make it sound good. It just makes me wonder -how many bands on the radio are just rich kids with limited talent, and a killer pro tools studio at their disposal ?
X
xstatic
New member
Nowhere in any of my posts did I say to go completely analog. There really aren't very many engineers and producers out there that actually still do work that don't use digital in some form or another. When I said "choosing the best possible sound" that wasn't meant in the global sense that analog was better, just that to the engineer that does choose analog it is better, or else they would have chosen digital. A couple years ago there was a real trend with studios doing albums in Pro Tools. Now that trend has pretty well ended. Most of the big studios seem to have settled into a really nice hybrid setup combining the best qualities and traits of the both of them. Another thing to remember is that a quality well maintained 2 track is certainly capable of a beautifully clean sound. I really have no problems with digital. I use a digital setup on a daily basis. I just refuse to pretend that digital is going to make analog disappear. Digital definately rules the home market, but high analog will always have it's place. No amount of digital gear will make Neve preamps or Calrec or Helios go away. Many people have tried to mimic them in the analog realm and it never fully works. What makes you think that digital will do any better? Partly what makes the vintage and high end gear so cool is that magic and slight randomness that comes with them. I agree that there will be better digital models coming out that will be more and more useful. Then again, it's all a matter of opinion. You may think that digital model X sounds just like analog model X, the next guy may come along and quickly point out many differences. Just like an Epiphone Les Paul and a Gibson Les Paul. Some guitar players think they are very similar, others see a huge difference.
Personally, I hope digital never does come out with too many mimic pieces. Before long albums will be made with the approach of a computer engineer rather than an artist. Not that there is anything wrong with being a computer engineer, but to me I want creativity and music. Not a matrix of data making my album. Having REAL gear forces people to do things for real. Are bands in 10 years not going to have any instruments? Will it be 2 guys on stage with a bunch of computers? Thats why analog won't go away. There will always be people out there that use it as a tool. One that sounds good, and becomes a part of the process of making music.
Personally, I hope digital never does come out with too many mimic pieces. Before long albums will be made with the approach of a computer engineer rather than an artist. Not that there is anything wrong with being a computer engineer, but to me I want creativity and music. Not a matrix of data making my album. Having REAL gear forces people to do things for real. Are bands in 10 years not going to have any instruments? Will it be 2 guys on stage with a bunch of computers? Thats why analog won't go away. There will always be people out there that use it as a tool. One that sounds good, and becomes a part of the process of making music.
X
xstatic
New member
Nowhere in any of my posts did I say to go completely analog. There really aren't very many engineers and producers out there that actually still do work that don't use digital in some form or another. When I said "choosing the best possible sound" that wasn't meant in the global sense that analog was better, just that to the engineer that does choose analog it is better, or else they would have chosen digital. A couple years ago there was a real trend with studios doing albums in Pro Tools. Now that trend has pretty well ended. Most of the big studios seem to have settled into a really nice hybrid setup combining the best qualities and traits of the both of them. Another thing to remember is that a quality well maintained 2 track is certainly capable of a beautifully clean sound. I really have no problems with digital. I use a digital setup on a daily basis. I just refuse to pretend that digital is going to make analog disappear. Digital definately rules the home market, but high analog will always have it's place. No amount of digital gear will make Neve preamps or Calrec or Helios go away. Many people have tried to mimic them in the analog realm and it never fully works. What makes you think that digital will do any better? Partly what makes the vintage and high end gear so cool is that magic and slight randomness that comes with them. I agree that there will be better digital models coming out that will be more and more useful. Then again, it's all a matter of opinion. You may think that digital model X sounds just like analog model X, the next guy may come along and quickly point out many differences. Just like an Epiphone Les Paul and a Gibson Les Paul. Some guitar players think they are very similar, others see a huge difference.
Personally, I hope digital never does come out with too many mimic pieces. Before long albums will be made with the approach of a computer engineer rather than an artist. Not that there is anything wrong with being a computer engineer, but to me I want creativity and music. Not a matrix of data making my album. Having REAL gear forces people to do things for real. Are bands in 10 years not going to have any instruments? Will it be 2 guys on stage with a bunch of computers? Thats why analog won't go away. There will always be people out there that use it as a tool. One that sounds good, and becomes a part of the process of making music.
Personally, I hope digital never does come out with too many mimic pieces. Before long albums will be made with the approach of a computer engineer rather than an artist. Not that there is anything wrong with being a computer engineer, but to me I want creativity and music. Not a matrix of data making my album. Having REAL gear forces people to do things for real. Are bands in 10 years not going to have any instruments? Will it be 2 guys on stage with a bunch of computers? Thats why analog won't go away. There will always be people out there that use it as a tool. One that sounds good, and becomes a part of the process of making music.
