I actually laughed when I read this ....

[MichaelM]

Watch the newbie forums now, there's going to be a lot of threads in there that go something like this:

"Help. I just spent $2500 on a mac, $80 on computer speakers, and $100 on an SM58. I want to make pro quality recordings like this article in USA Today said I could. How the hell do I use all this stuff. Anyway I'm a complete n00b and I need your help!"

Of course there's no knowledge required for recording, just a mac.

 

[cjacek]

Ok, obviously I was kidding with regards to the earlier "deaf/stupid/blasphemous .." reply. I know of at least one talented person who tracks to digital (with external analog setup, tube pres etc ..) who makes absolutely "killer" tracks, which can sound 50's if one wishes to. For me to state otherwise or insult people who opt for digital would not be responsible. It's obvious then that some can make true magic from their digital setups, provided that talent is plentiful (and one is comfortable with the medium) and that careful selection of outboard gear is paid attention to. At the same time, who the hell am I to pass judgement ? Ok, so I hate DAW's, tracking to PC and the mere thought of storing sounds to a lifeless, abstract, "virtual", digital medium of 0's and 1's .... so what ? That's only me.

~Daniel

 

[Beck]

Both here and on the old Tascam forum, I used the word religion some time back while discussing the digital craze, how it got started and how it persists today. Regebro took it and ran with it, but turned it around and applied it to analog.

Ironically, even other digital heads have used regebro’s “religion” in discussions with me about analog – thinking they were saying something profound that would just blow me away. (Laugh track here)

I previously used the term in digital/analog discussions so I feel obliged to put it back into perspective. Having studied the psychology of cults and extremist groups I saw parallels between how an irrational move from a mature analog technology to an experimental digital took place. Like many movements it was a product of good marketing and snowballing groupthink.

In the beginning there was a sense that digital was just so beyond the average recordist that it was user error that produced poor results – the user was not worthy. People clung to faith that once they were baptized, confirmed and trained in the ways of the holy order, the digital god would answer. After that didn’t materialize with early digital systems people put faith in an evolving digital yet to come – higher, bit rate, resolution, better AD converters, etc. When that prophecy wasn’t fulfilled truth itself was redefined to fit the digital paradigm.

There were schisms and denominations formed within the digital movement. There were and still are the digital purists who say, “I don’t hear anything. What’s wrong with it?” Then there are the reformists who do hear something unnatural so have pursued tubes/valves and other circuitry to add “warmth” and “character.”

Then there are the “non-believers” like some of us. Though our preferred technology is mature, tried and proven, younger generations who have only known digital see us as “The Others.”

The truth is most of us know digital has come a long way and can be used to augment an analog studio. Can it stand on its own? Not to my ears. If it could I would happily use it. It’s convenient, feature rich and economically smart. It just doesn’t deliver.

The USA Today article that inspired this thread crosses the line of ridiculous. It is more of the same breathless worship of a false digital god that started the whole trend.

The amateur or noob is not surprised by the claims in the article. It’s easy to believe as it blends nicely with our computer-centric culture. What shocks the amateur is that there could be a crisis in the professional recording industry for a shortage of analog tape – “They still use that stuff?”

Amen

 

[cjacek]

As someone who has studied psychology and how it relates to our behaviour, I can especially appreciate the fascinating take you have on the subject. Well done and very interesting, Tim.

~Daniel

 

[Dr ZEE]

...I know of at least one talented person who tracks to digital (with external analog setup, tube pres etc ..) who makes killer tracks which can sound very reminiscent to that 50's or 60's sound.

Daniel, hope you don't mind me trying to make a 'serious' plug here
You see, I guess, the whole point here is, that all the killer tracks produced by the talented person you know would be 'better' if they were recorded on analog equipment (of course it would take free will, special knowledge, effort and experience ... it's not a free ride, in a sense. Another words, if the producer 'hates analog fathfully' or simply does not want to deal with it, then forget it , then sure, the producer will be better off with digital platform, - sadly, I may add ).
Based on my knowledge of technology and overall music recording/production/reproduction chain (process), I can make this statement: digital recording/reproduction is not a compromise (nor an alternative) to analog recording/reproduction, but rather is a compromise (or an alternative) to recording/reproduction period.

*********
Beck! Good writing

 

[cjacek]

digital recording/reproduction is not a compromise (nor an alternative) to analog recording/reproduction, but rather is a compromise (or an alternative) to recording/reproduction period.

You really don't need to convince me, I know ..

ANALOG is TRUTH to me and that's that.

Daniel

 

[A Reel Person]

Eh,... Warning: Rant, 1000 Yards Ahead!!

It's not like me to argue with regebro,... (yeah, right!),... but forgive me if with my lowly, average intelligence perspective, I've discerned nothing but die-hard digi-heads clamoring to get that "analog sound, that analog's so famous for",... whatever that means in scientific, quantifiable terms. There's article after article, post after post on that simple subject. In contrast, I don't think I've ever read a single post that had an analog purist looking for ways to capture that "digital sound, that digital's so famous for". Beyond all our "less-intelligent-than-regebro"-perceptions, the numbers speak for themselves. (Heh: numbers- a digital pun, there folks!)

Anyway, cutting to the chase,... of all the best recordings and producers I've read about, digital recordists though they may be,... I've read on to see that the majority of them have huge and/or premium analog front ends!... i.e., analog preamps, analog mixers, analog tube mics, analog side-chain effects, etc.

It's one thing to say that Dave/A Reel Person is a die-hard analog fanatic, and for good reason. My experience & credibility is miniscule and limited compared to what goes on in the "real world". However, the bulk of the evidence, testimonial, (etc), that I've come across says that digital is a limited cripple that needs an analog crutch to reach full potential. The evidence is out there, and it's not just me sitting at my 'puter spouting off that it's so.

I'm not one to buy into current fads and hype, and therefore I've remained pretty insulated from all the changes in recording technology,... and "the industry". I don't usually catch onto a "new" band or recording technology until it's at least 10 years old. Call that lag-time, or tell me I have my head buried in the sand,... or whatever,... but it's kept me focused on my goals, the basics of what I know, my foundational "skill" and/or "technique", and it's kept me from being yanked every different direction, each time a "new innovation" hits the market. (reads: new gimmick).

Sorry for the armchair philosophy, as I know most people don't care what I have to say or think,... especially the "regebro-types". Sorry for the run-on sentences and poor grammatical structure in my post, and I'm sure it's less than "regebro-standard".

Beyond that, I'm not one to argue religion or politics on a BBS,... with only a few scattered and minor exceptions, where I've been sucked in by an obvious troller,... (no names!)

However, to say that analog recording has become a cult religion, is simply "anti-regebro",... (reads: moronic).

Thank you all for indulging me, & perhaps listening. Beyond that, research and listen for yourselves, and find your own "personal best". I'll always be based in analog, and I really don't care if most people flock to digital. (reads: more analog gear for me!!!)

Anyway,... I heard the Tascam Pocketstudio 5 is just like Pro-Tools! So, knock yerselves out!!

 

[A Reel Person]

Anyway,...

I've discerned that regebro himself has a Tascam M-2524 as a front end to his Delta-1010, while his Fostex A-8 seems to have been pushed to the side, like a paperweight or doorstop! Regebro has a long way to go, before crowing about "digital superiority".

 

[SteveMac]

Daniel, hope you don't mind me trying to make a 'serious' plug here
You see, I guess, the whole point here is, that all the killer tracks produced by the talented person you know would be 'better' if they were recorded on analog equipment (of course it would take free will, special knowledge, effort and experience ... it's not a free ride, in a sense. Another words, if the producer 'hates analog fathfully' or simply does not want to deal with it, then forget it , then sure, the producer will be better off with digital platform, - sadly, I may add ).
Based on my knowledge of technology and overall music recording/production/reproduction chain (process), I can make this statement: digital recording/reproduction is not a compromise (nor an alternative) to analog recording/reproduction, but rather is a compromise (or an alternative) to recording/reproduction period.

*********
Beck! Good writing

I had this link to the making of Brian Wilson's new "Smile" CD. I don't know where it went but in it he was saying that that he liked recording digitally. Well, the new Smile sounds great but it's no Pet Sounds!

I was on a Pet Sounds kick about a month ago and I kept thinking "there will never be anything like this again. " I'm sure there will be but it's hard to imagine in these digital days.

Digital tracking to me makes everything sound the same. I don't believe that using tubes adds warmth. I don't think warmth is everything either. I like the sound of cold too. I would say the Phil Specter sound is cold , but in a different way. I appreciate the clarity that digital offers but clarity isn't all it.

 

[regebro]

I've discerned that regebro himself has a Tascam M-2524 as a front end to his Delta-1010, while his Fostex A-8 seems to have been pushed to the side, like a paperweight or doorstop! Regebro has a long way to go, before crowing about "digital superiority".

Now, when did I say anything even remotely similar to that, except in your fevered imagination?


Yes, guys, this is a religious question. And you guys are subscribing to the analog religion, and some other guys are subscribing to the digital religion. One of the problems with people here, like a Reel Person, is that to defend his analog religion, he has to pretend that everybody that doesn't agree with him are of the devil! (that is, the digital religion). Of course, I belong to neither, so the only thing that happens is that he makes an ass of himself, as always.

Reel, if you, just for once, would actually read anything I post before you go on to rants about how stupid I am, you'll see that in my original post here I asked if maybe it was more a question of how you used the equipment than if it is digital or analog. This, you somehow turn into "crowing about digital superiority".

Tha ferocity and panic that is so discernable in your reaction to this is proof enough that you actually are very worried about having made the wrong choices. Why? Analog is cool! Why do you feel you have to resort to firebrand preaching and personal attacks to justify your choices of equipment?

 

[johneeeveee]

DAW article

... what cracks me up more than anything about that article is the fact that it lists what you need to buy, but never mentions anything about the skill and experience involved in actually engineering a recording.
by the way, i live in the nw and have heard the seattle based artist and subject of the article... let's just say that in my opinion, the medium wouldn't matter... garbage in garbage out.
for what it's worth you guys and your bickering kill me ... why not expend that energy on making records... who cares about the format!? write some good shit and record it on whatever you have, or prefer. that argument is getting sooooooo ooooold... sheesh - jv

 

[ausrock]

Well I don't have HR Comp CD II, but I do have the first one and if it is at all representative of the 2nd CD then I don't understand the relevance of that link to this discussion.

For the record.........I have both 16 trk digital and 16 trk 1" R2R recorders and continue to use both, but from the experience of tracking to both mediums, I know that for any future recordings of "importance", R2R will be the prefered recording media.

What I continue to see is that people who have chosen to either continue with, or go back to analogue, are generally happy to acknowledge that digital has got it's place, etc., whereas those who exclusively use digital, seem to find it almost impossible to even consider that it is less than perfect and that "old technology" may be still capable of producing a "better" product, relatively speaking. Actually, this following quote from Regebro could easily sit with the majority of digital users....................."Tha ferocity and panic that is so discernable in your reaction to this is proof enough that you actually are very worried about having made the wrong choices .

 

[regebro]

What I continue to see is that people who have chosen to either continue with, or go back to analogue, are generally happy to acknowledge that digital has got it's place, etc., whereas those who exclusively use digital, seem to find it almost impossible to even consider that it is less than perfect

You conveniently forget the people who do not acknowledge that digital has it's place, evident in this thread.

 

[ausrock]

For your information, I wasn't specifically refering to this thread ...............my comments were based on a far wider exposure and in retrospect, posts in this thread had no bearing on my comments.

 

[regebro]

No, but it is evident, from this forum alone, that there are analog fanatics who will claim that analog is better no matter what, just as you say that there are people who claim igital is better, no matter what (I haven't many any, at least not the last fifteen years, but there ya go).

What you did above, when ypu ignored this camp, was effectively to say that either you are a digital fanatic, or you are a reasonable person, who believes analog is better.

 

[ausrock]

Read again...........I use both formats, I believe each has it's place but I believe the old technology will still produce a more pleasing product.

"Better" is a term constantly in dispute.

To my knowledge and I'm happy to be corrected, one fact that is not disputed is that there are frequencies captured in the analogue format which digital by it's very nature won't capture. Also, at it's very best, digital is still "approximating".........this applies to both visual and audio forms. Now, if your recording requirements aren't compromised by the above, then fine, be happy, I know I am when I choose to record to digital, but while ever digital has the limitations it is currently burdened with, it is not reasonable to consider it "superior". I believe that while more and more people are beginning to understand these "limitations", they will continue to follow the digital path with it's much lower entry level price point, it's fantastic editing facilities and in particular it's ability to let the user polish an infinte number of turds.

No, I'm not anti-digital or analogue...........I just choose to believe that both have their pros and cons............analogue has the ability to produce a more pleasant sound while digital is cheaper, usually less costly to maintain and you don't risk cutting you fingers with razors during editing.

 

[A Reel Person]

Eh,... regebro,...

I'm certainly not panicked in my reaction or defense of analog. To each their own,... is fine with me.

As for your "more analogs per square inch" comment,... that was as nonsensical and decipherable as anything I've ever seen you post.

As for us, you & me respectively,... for as long as you posture as a self-proclaimed genius, I'll continue to poke fun at you. That's just the bottom line gist of my posts.

Back to reality,... the truth is that I've never heard your recordings, regebro, but I've read (or skimmed) almost all your posts, which I disagree with almost 100%, and I've seen your setup in pics, which is fine. That I skim some of your posts is indicative of the inaccuracies you my find in my replies. I'm not one who claims infallibility, like some people we know!

I have no religious fervor when it comes to analog, but I'm sure within my own mind that it's right for me. For the whole world to shift to digital, it does not bother me a bit,... in fact I gain tangible analog value in that deal.

For "named" and "pro" producers to use reel-to-reel recorders as side-chain effects devices,... and then have the mainstream recording press proclaim that as ingenious and forward-thinking,... just makes me laugh! It paints the picture very strongly, one way in favor of analog.

I like your fervor, regebro. For however much I may disagree with the substance of your posts, that you may rail against me and/or call me names, it's all in good fun! For however much you posture as being genius or a superior-level thinker, and that your points of view are infallible, I'll always be here to lampoon that, & deflate that bubble in my posts.

Again, this bbs is hardly a "Reel vs. regebro" showcase. We're just part of the whole mix.

Thanx, & have a nice day!

 

[regebro]

If you were poking fun at me, why are you fuming out of your ears and inventing things about me in an effort to make me look bad, like me being a self-proclaimed genius, and claiming that digital is superiour? Thats complete bullshit, Reel. If you were "poking fun" you would not have to make up lies to cover yourself.

And why are you making every single debate into a discussion about me? What do I have to do with an discussion about analog vs digital?

 

[regebro]

ausrock: the problem with your statement is that you split the world into people that are religiously pro digital, and people who are reasonable and knowledgeable and agree with you that analog sounds better. That is a false dichotomy. The world does not split up into these groups.

 

[A Reel Person]

Now who has steam coming out of his ears??

....................

Analog is better. Case closed.

No personal element there, 'cept my own biased opinion.

I've seen your stance as being mainly analog, for all these years. Pls forgive me. My posts and assumptions are not always accurate. I don't always respond to the most immediate, previous post, but sometimes to my perception of the bulk of your posts. That you've not proclaimed yourself a genius in this previous post is true, but you've done it many times in many previous posts. All in all, I see it for the joke it is, and I ask that if I poke fun at that, that you see it as a joke, too. The most outspoken bbs heads make themselves the biggest targets for criticism. I get that, myself. For me to cite your name in any way is unfair, not cool, and not usually any accurate or valid criticism. My apologies.

Nothing personal, 'bro.