J
jaynm26
New member
Which has better quality Digital Mixer or Analog Mixer
Chili
Site Moderator
Coming into the Analog section and asking this question is almost trolling. So, I'll be watching this thread and will delete it if it gets out of control.
The politically correct answer is both. Neither Digital nor Analog has anything to do with quality. It is the quality of the equipment and the person using it that makes the difference.
The politically correct answer is both. Neither Digital nor Analog has anything to do with quality. It is the quality of the equipment and the person using it that makes the difference.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Exactly, Chili.
Put a Cadac J Class analogue mixer up against any digital board I can think of and the Cadac will win hands down. It'll also take four strong men to carry it into your house and you'll need a large mortgage.
Put a Midas Pro6 or even my little Yamaha DM1000 up against a host of small analogue mixers and the digitals will win, even before you consider that you have a box full of outboard included.
There are good, mediocre and bad mixers in both analogue and digital.
Put a Cadac J Class analogue mixer up against any digital board I can think of and the Cadac will win hands down. It'll also take four strong men to carry it into your house and you'll need a large mortgage.
Put a Midas Pro6 or even my little Yamaha DM1000 up against a host of small analogue mixers and the digitals will win, even before you consider that you have a box full of outboard included.
There are good, mediocre and bad mixers in both analogue and digital.
C
Chilljam
transitional phase
Budget and intended use please?
B
Beck
Guest
I generally interpret these sorts of questions as all-things-being-equal questions. That is, we assume the two devices being compared are well regarded in their respective categories. It could be a fair question since some people use digital mixers with analog tape and other analog devices.
The answer is: It depends whom you ask.
If you ask me... well I will never use a digital mixer for anything serious, though many other people do. My general approach is to leave a project in the analog realm until the latest possible stage. A mixing console is one of the first possible stages, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that I don't care for them.
The answer is: It depends whom you ask.
If you ask me... well I will never use a digital mixer for anything serious, though many other people do. My general approach is to leave a project in the analog realm until the latest possible stage. A mixing console is one of the first possible stages, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that I don't care for them.
lonewhitefly
Active member
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
THIS is a digital mixer, in this case about $150,000 and 56 channels worth of cuddly sonic goodness, especially through the D&B line array it drives.
However, something makes me think the OP was thinking of something a bit less expensive and in a world where analogue is very much in the battle!
Last edited:
B
Beck
Guest
There is no level in which analog consoles are not in “The Battle.” You simply have some who prefer one approach and others who prefer another approach. You couldn’t make a digital console expensive enough or feature-laden enough to persuade some people to choose it over the sound and approach of analog mixing. If they prefer how analog behaves through all the various stages, including EQ, then that’s what they will choose. There are many great analog consoles that I’d have to sell my house to afford them. I’m not interested in doing that however.
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
They're all just tools and both sorts have their applications.
Offer me any console in the world with no need for other considerations and my favourite (I'm thinking live work here just because that's where I know the really big consoles) would be a Cadac J Class analogue. They sound superb and just feel good to operate.
However, once you start adding in real world practicalities, that Midas Pro6 I pictured above is also a superb console--silky smooth mic preamps and an EQ section that just makes it easy to sit things in the mix. Beyond that, I only need to take about a third as many seats out of service to get the same number of channels and same amount of outboard. In the live sound world (particularly theatre) size is a major issue--if I take six seats that sell for $100 a show times 7 shows a week times 52 weeks, that's real money. However, that lovely Cadac would need more like 12 seats so you can see the dilemma.
Anyhow, as I say, they're both tools and both have applications. I happily use either. My home studio set up happens to be a digital mixer now but it was a Soundcraft analogue before that--I've enjoyed both--and if anyone has strong feelings one way or another, so be it! Heck, when I started, mixers had knobs not faders and editing involved Chinagraph pencils and razor blades!
Offer me any console in the world with no need for other considerations and my favourite (I'm thinking live work here just because that's where I know the really big consoles) would be a Cadac J Class analogue. They sound superb and just feel good to operate.
However, once you start adding in real world practicalities, that Midas Pro6 I pictured above is also a superb console--silky smooth mic preamps and an EQ section that just makes it easy to sit things in the mix. Beyond that, I only need to take about a third as many seats out of service to get the same number of channels and same amount of outboard. In the live sound world (particularly theatre) size is a major issue--if I take six seats that sell for $100 a show times 7 shows a week times 52 weeks, that's real money. However, that lovely Cadac would need more like 12 seats so you can see the dilemma.
Anyhow, as I say, they're both tools and both have applications. I happily use either. My home studio set up happens to be a digital mixer now but it was a Soundcraft analogue before that--I've enjoyed both--and if anyone has strong feelings one way or another, so be it! Heck, when I started, mixers had knobs not faders and editing involved Chinagraph pencils and razor blades!
witzendoz
Senior Member
This can only get more interesting
L
LToro
New member
Give me a second..
L
LToro
New member
But high end analog and high end digital are practically identical!
Beck you don't know me and I respect your taste and analog ways. But I am willing to bet that you can't tell a high end digital signal from a high end analog one. I am sure you can't pick them apart. No one can..
Bristol Posse
Okey Dokey
By what objective, quantifiable measurement are you going to define better?
without that it's just opinion and emotion
B
Beck
Guest
Actually nearly everyone who understands how each technology works and knows what to listen for can tell the difference. There are certain qualities and flaws in each technology that are peculiar to that technology. Many of the telltale signs are identical to ITB mixing vs. traditional OTB mixing.
When you have an all-digital setup, then yes, it becomes more difficult to tell which recording stage is contributing the most obvious objectionable artifacts. Of course I can pick them apart, just as I can compare different analog consoles side-by-side and have a preference. But comparing two analog mixers or two digital "mixers" involves different listening criteria.
Mr Clean
AKA Teddy Wong
Don't you just love the "vs" questions. They're so fascinating!
Bobbsy
Boring Old Git
Yeah, especially when, like this one, it's completely down to subjective opinion.
I'm certainly not going to come to the Analogue only forum and argue against analogue. As noted above, there are analogue mixers that I think sound great and would choose in an instant. However, what I won't do is argue that this is because analogue contains fewer artifacts. It's more to the point that the artifacts and distortions caused by analogue are very pleasing to the ear. Warmth, for example, isn't "accuracy"...it's actually a fault but a nice one to have.
If digital has a problem it's that it's too clean and accurate. However, on the good digital boards, a lot of attention is paid to the analogue sections--for example the pre-amps on the Midas Pro6 rival anything you'll hear on the best fully analogue mixer--and this makes a huge difference to the full signal path even though most of it is digital.
Anyhow, as I said earlier, analogue and digital are just tools. The decision between them is based on a mix of practical considerations and a lot of personal preference. Personally, I happily use either and won't generalise that either is automatically better.
Mr Clean
AKA Teddy Wong
Never mind the fact that it's such a broad question, entirely based on peoples opinion and the OP hasn't stated any requirements of either such mixer or price willing he's to pay. May as well just put a poll up and got an average percentage of what people prefer.
Chili
Site Moderator
Yeah, The OP is almost trolling. He's going around asking pointless questions here and there... kind of getting on my nerve. But people are responding and in a good way, so not going to do anything yet.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I think for live shows and especially more theatrical ones....digital mixers seem to get the nod these days because of the setting/recall capabilities. I work in IT by day, but one part of my IT world involves a 4,500 seat theater that hosts evrything from Country acts to Broadway shows and acrobatic troupes.
So when I poke my head in the theater during load in and sound checks...that's what I've seen lately.
Some of the more "traditional" music acts still tend to prefer all-analog mixers.
For pure recording/mixing, where I wanted the mixer to be part of, and add to, the flavor of the audio....?
Analog all the way.
So when I poke my head in the theater during load in and sound checks...that's what I've seen lately.
Some of the more "traditional" music acts still tend to prefer all-analog mixers.
For pure recording/mixing, where I wanted the mixer to be part of, and add to, the flavor of the audio....?
Analog all the way.
Farview
Well-known member
In the studio, if I were to use a console for mixing, it would be analog. This is simply because I can't see much of a difference between a digital mixer and mixing ITB. With mixing ITB, I can choose which EQ and compression plugins, from an array of companies and designs, that I want to use for each instrument. On a digital mixer, you have the same thing on every channel.
For theater, digital all the way. Mostly because everything can be automated. There are so many times when a person mumbles in one scene and screams his head off in the next. I can program the gain structure differently for each scene, set the compression differently for each scene, have effects preset, etc... You can do that manually on an analog console for one or two channels, but once you get up to 40-50 channels in the show, it's just too much to keep up with without this kind of automation.
For theater, digital all the way. Mostly because everything can be automated. There are so many times when a person mumbles in one scene and screams his head off in the next. I can program the gain structure differently for each scene, set the compression differently for each scene, have effects preset, etc... You can do that manually on an analog console for one or two channels, but once you get up to 40-50 channels in the show, it's just too much to keep up with without this kind of automation.