It just cracks me up....

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blue Bear Sound
  • Start date Start date
"ADATS are one of the most reliable formats I know of"

they are so reliable that certain years fixing them was the only thing I had time to do! Thanks alesis for the reliability, as it kept food in my mouth
 
Who the hell will ever tell that the old fostex cassette machines are even comparable to the digital machines of today costing the same money... It is RIDICULOUS!

Even on my vs880 recorded in MT1 which does audio compression, there is SO MUCH LESS bouncing artifacts than on my porta studio thing and the fostex I used to own. Plus: the ability of using fx without adding tons of noise... IMO the guys who state their cassette multitrack being so analogue are simply too stupid to use their digital workstation (if they ever used one).

These guys seem to me like someone owning a 600 ccm smart (german car - about the smallest thing you can ever imagine...) overtaking a Ferrari in a town simply because he drives 70km/h instead of the allowed 50 and then stating that he can 'even overtake ferraris with no problem'... I HATE THESE DUMBASSES! Munich has got too much of them, so I kind of lost my politeness...

Sorry

aXel
 
Recording Engineer said:
Hey guys, well NOTHING sure as hell beats analog ADATs!!!
Click to expand...

...it's funny, I thought all ADAT's are digital..:confused:


(Alessis Digital Audio Tape... ?


:D :D :D
 
jake I`m with ya there on the magic part. My Vesta Fire 4 track was so keen, even with the play lever I made out of a piece of bent coat hanger after it broke off. I keep that magic out in the shed with a case of mason jars sittin on top of its box. I think there`s a wooden stepladder and a wheelbarrow out there too.
:)
 
Shailat said:
I'll tell you something RE....ADATS are one of the most reliable formats I know of. Years and years of recording on ADATS and they have a fantastic track record of reliability. True that in a year they will be in a museum but I think they deserve a respectable place.
Click to expand...

Aaa... Reliability was not an ounce of the point... I was talking about sound quality... Obviously, I can't get as good quality with my 24-bit HD24 as I can with the "analog ADATs" the other studio is running...:rolleyes:

James Argo said:
...it's funny, I thought all ADAT's are digital..:confused:
Click to expand...

Glad to know someone noticed!
 
I tend to enjoy every joke that is being explained to me...

:D:D:D
 
I don't run a studio, and thus do not see a string of clients. But I have spent a few years of my life (not any more thank God!) in the Musical Instrument Retail world. And I don't recall a single instance where someone bought a porta-studio from me with the honest intention of making "the great American record album". Even the 15 year old guitarists who bought them from me had the understanding that they were buying budget recording gear.

Although I have better gear now, I still think that a cassette-based porta studio is a great "sketch pad" to work out songs & arrangements. But I find it surprising that anyone out there would bring in tracks recorded on one to a "real" studio for transfer. Has this actually happend with any frequency?
 
It gets even better... This was after spending 20 minutes expaining WHY 24-bits is better than 16-bit... Quality of the converters aside... And that ADATs are absolutely NOT "analog" in the sense that people mean when they say "I only record on analog." Or "Analog good! Digital Bad!"

No matter how much you explain something, some people simply don't have the brain to understand that just because it uses analog tape, it doesn't mean it's "analog" in the same sense that plagues our industry!

THIS is the same concept of what Blue Bear is talking about!!!

These same brains can't seem to grasp -10 doesn't mean unbalanced and +4 doesn't mean balanced! An XLR connector doesn't mean balanced! And the list goes-on... Ever try explaining that a digital connection LOOKS like an analog connection, but it's not?! A guy I know STILL can't fingure that one out after 5 years now!!!

I don't know... I guess too many drugs? Or not enough oxygen at birth?

So who here is tired of this Analog vs. Digital bullshit?
Besides, there's SO much more on "Who's ears are behind it all..." part of the ratio than ANYTHING else!!!

Fact is: They BOTH have their strengths and weaknesses! And NEITHER is going ANYWHERE for AT LEAST the next 10 years! And over that time, A LOT of bitchin' records are going to to recorded on BOTH!!!
 
Many people have no grasp of electronics, digital or analog. They do not understand the concepts or principles involved nor the theory behind all of it.

Without some basic understanding of electronic theory, these folks do not, and never will understand what is or isn't going on in that magic box that records music be it tape, CD, HD, DAT, ADAT, or MD.

All they go by is what they're feed by the media and the tackle box kid at the local superstore.
 
yeah...everybody is a freakin' idiot...and "that" format sucks, and "this" format is what I like, as my ears are friggin better than all the people who think that sounds good, but I "know"...cause I know someone that has done it!! ....and he's my friend too....so there!!!:rolleyes:

the new format that isn't digital nor analog is going to be the best one anyway. ...cause Roger Nichols says so...
 
isn't this HOMErecording bbs?

Now for a real question.
Can you 'pros' tell analog from digital once you've got it onto a CD? 16/44.1

and almost the same question:
Is there a reason for 'pros' to bother with analog if it gets converted to digital on the final product?
 
Is anyone else here tired of this whole digital versus analog thing? :D

Get over it. Bruce's original post had nothing to do with this!
 
That was a great thread. Thanks for the link.

Can you 'pros' tell analog from digital once you've got it onto a CD? 16/44.1
Click to expand...
I don't claim to be a professional. There are a few here and I wouldn't be so arrogant to assume that my mixes sound as good as theirs. You know who you are.

I can tell the difference in something that was recorded on a 2"analog deck and mastered digitally, and something recorded and mastered in the digital domain entirely. I'm sure there are many who can without being a paid professional...if you know what your ears are telling you or not telling you.

You can especially tell with re-mastered-to-digital original analog recordings that have been re-released on CD.

I don't debate the merits of analog and digital recording. That argument is worn out for me. Each of us will decide what they like the best based on their experience, that of others, the media, and their budget and technical ability no matter what it sounds like to someone else. This thread was not about that argument to begin with.
 
chessrock said:
Is anyone else here tired of this whole digital versus analog thing? :D
Click to expand...


Obviously not, or we wouldn't be posting, would we? :D

Get over it. Bruce's original post had nothing to do with this!
Click to expand...

Sure it did. I have stuff on 4-track analog that I have been unable to reproduce to the same quality with digital. Granted I don't have the best digital gear, but that's not the point. Dollar for dollar analog sounds better to my ears.

That doesn't mean I'm going to sell my DAW to buy tape though.......

:D
 
Granted I don't have the best digital gear, but that's not the point.
Click to expand...

Actually, that was a little closer to the original point, but who's keeping track? :D

That doesn't mean I'm going to sell my DAW to buy tape though.......
Click to expand...

Why not? You just said you're cheapo 4-track sounds so much better, and all that "dollar-for-dollar" stuff. I'm confused! :D
 
maybe cuz in the end, many people will take a better performance, than a better sound anyday

the better performance is easier to ahem synthesize digitally...if a band cant play for crap, they wont sound good on analog, just sound like hi fi crap
 
Screw all this analog crap, I'm going for that "digital sound". I'm recording this really anoying song, and I want it to really bug the crap out of the listener. Perfect.

Mini disk is digital right?

Modus
 
I had a cassette 4 track about ten years ago and I thought it sounded like shit (but then so did the rest of my gear). I didn't record much as a result, and never got a chance to learn that much.

I now have a DAW, having spent way too much cash on gear, and I like the results I am getting (on a temporary basis--until I hear my mistakes). Also, I've been very excited about recording as my results are in the general vicinity of the recordings I listen to.

However, I'd like to get an along deck, if only to have it as another option/color. I say accept both mediums and maybe we'll get to keep both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top