Just curious as to why still analog??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tim Walker
  • Start date Start date
Beck said:
Anecdotal arguments about people who can’t hear the difference are of little value. They only tell us that those people can’t hear the difference, but not that there isn’t a difference.

There are people who can hear the difference. That’s why there is even an issue.

I was once demoing some audio processing to my wife (now my ex) in A/B Processing in, processing out. She could not hear the difference at all and of course told me that it was in my imagination. To me the difference was huge and in a moment of insight I came up with something else for her to compare.

She "thought she could hear something but was not sure. What was this second test?







Sterio, mono.
 
RICK FITZPATRICK said:
That doesn't matter. If that was all that were on the grocery shelves, you wouldn't have a choice would you. Like it or not, thats what you would eat. It is the PLAYBACK MACHINE MANUFACTURERS that dictate this. NOT CHOICE. And GOVERNMENT EMBRACES IT!!! Wait till they mandate DIGITAL BROADCASTING ONLY in the US. FUCK THEM. This whole digital/analog media choice thing will be the MARK OF THE BEAST. WITHOUT ANALOG, sometime in the near future, you won't know what is real anymore as EVERYTHING can be altered/controlled. INCLUDING PROPAGANDA/NEWS/FREEDOM.


All I can say to the people who embrace digital is.........YOU MADE YOUR BED>>>ENJOY YOUR DEMISE AS YOU ARE ABOUT TO MEET THE NEW WORLD ORDER. If you think I'm kidding, wait 10 years.

FUCK DIGITAL. ANALOG IS REAL.
fitZ

Do you have a point?
 
Beck said:
... above 0 dB the signal breaks down into garbage.

hey hey hey! Speak Parameters and values, please! You are very hard to follow, man :D
 
regebro said:
That's What they always used to cost. That's the most high-end bleeding edge part of the machine.

With all due respect, but you are way off here. There is no doubt that analog tape has a longer "shelf life" than digital. You'll be able to step into a major studio with 24 track 2" long after any DASH format has been relegated to the people specialized in recovering data from old storage mediums.

Digital does have one benefit: If you keep you archives updated, that is, you re-wind any tapes once a year, and when you move to a new archive format you also move all your old ones, and this way constantly keep your data in a readable medium, if you do that, digital stores for ever. Analog, of course, will loose quality in every generation. Luckily for us, there probably are no more generations. ;)

With all due respect, analog heads go for like 500-3000$ each. It is still true today. Try JRF for one. Analog tape vs. digital storage is another thing all together. I do agree.
 
Beck said:
Come and gone for who? Come and gone for you – yes. Live with your decision without expecting everyone to agree. It is a great feeling of freedom to be able to make choices based on real preference without social pressure. I highly recommend it. As much as I have due respect for the greats in the recording industry who still use analog they could dump it tomorrow, but unless digital changes for the better my studio will remain as it is.

Digital is an immature technology that has failed to deliver. Why exchange something that already is for something that may one day be? There are people that dumped analog for digital 10-15 years ago that are still waiting. What sense does that make if you can use analog while you wait? When digital finally arrives I’ll be the first one in line.

"Having been an audio lemming myself, who discarded an analogue multitrack for a digital version, I have in some respects come to see the error of my ways, and on cold, lonely nights in the chill digital air-conditioning of my studio I dream of basking in the glow of a warm analog fire. Perhaps the greatest advantage of analogue recording is its wonderfully 'warm' sound quality."
-DAVID MELLOR
Sound On Sound - May 1997



They are in the best studios around the globe. They are in countless lesser-known studios around the globe. Again this is a shock to noobs . Why are you asking questions that have already been answered in this thread with verifiable statistics?

“For many, analog tape is still the preferred way to record music. How long that lasts is uncertain. One thing, however, is sure: A quick survey of major studios and mastering rooms will show a clear preponderance of “Ferraris” (read Studer, Ampex ATR, etc) parked in the control rooms.”
-Jeff Gilman- Chief Alchemist - Precision Motor Works
Mix Magazine - Oct. 2003


As for manufacturers, we are living in a new economy where traditional indicators no longer give the whole picture. Welcome to the 21st Century. Analog machines of every variety are a hot commodity on eBay and other Internet outlets, as well as showroom floors in large metropolitan areas. It is a huge refurb market. In that sense they are still being made or remade, if you will.

“Analog machines will continue to be serviceable—now, after 20, 30 or 40 years and in the future—because they mostly consist of hardware that any skilled machinist can re-create. (No digital format will be as easy to support after manufacturers throw in the towel.)”
-Eddie Cilleti
Mix Magazine Aug. 2000


http://www.atrservice.com
http://www.jrfmagnetics.com/
http://www.athan.com/cgi-local/store.cgi?cat1=1003&s=1
http://www.precisionmotorworks.com/
http://iemmag.com/audio.html
http://www.sprague-magnetics.com/audio.htm#asales


I hope that is not the only argument because it is a very bad one. I describe this age we are living as one of incompetence and minimal standards. It is hardly reasonable to suggest that the masses in this particular time and space have made a choice based on quality. Even many of those that believe they are choosing quality are doing so based on digital mythology. I’ve said this before and it’s worth remembering:

“You will find that people in the analog camp are generally more informed and aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both formats. Ours is a truly informed choice based on experience – mostly bad experience with digital.

Rather than blindly go with the marketing flow, those who have chosen analog, for the most part, are those who have made a real choice.”

-Beck


As a life lesson I recommend everyone watch the movie, “Zulu” 1964. It is based on a true story of the battle of Rorke's Drift outpost, South Africa in 1879 when 150 British soldiers held off 4,000 Zulu warriors. The lesson? Superior numbers does not equal superior. I would rather be a part of the elite.

No, but if grape jelly is what you want I’m sure most would prefer real grapes in it, not just artificial flavor.

-Tim

I wish you would read at least 1 of my posts. I give up. You guys cannot read. I now know I am dealing with people who cannot read.

You tell me why I said that.

Also, where are you guys when Otari wants to sell their 2 channel machine for like $3000? Analog guys here are so cheap that they buy shit off of eBay for $100. Pony up or shut up. If eBay did not exist, you would be going digital in a split second. Why don't you two faced engineers buy an Otari? They need the buisiness, or are you guys too cheap?
 
acorec said:
Why don't you two faced engineers buy an Otari? They need the buisiness, or are you guys too cheap?

cos, we maybe are stupid, but ain't total morans yet.
heh heh... where's my John Deer Tractor??? ah, here it is , cos' I've got like five tomato plants to take care behind my house... ;) . We are home recordists, remember? We suck, man... :D
My cables are also too short to be pro, and they are so freakin' unbalanced.... they would not stick into damn otari .... :D
 
evm1024 said:
I was once demoing some audio processing to my wife (now my ex) in A/B Processing in, processing out. She could not hear the difference at all and of course told me that it was in my imagination. To me the difference was huge and in a moment of insight I came up with something else for her to compare.

She "thought she could hear something but was not sure. What was this second test?







Sterio, mono.
Was she naked?
 
acorec said:
I wish you would read at least 1 of my posts. I give up. You guys cannot read. I now know I am dealing with people who cannot read.

You tell me why I said that.

Also, where are you guys when Otari wants to sell their 2 channel machine for like $3000? Analog guys here are so cheap that they buy shit off of eBay for $100. Pony up or shut up. If eBay did not exist, you would be going digital in a split second. Why don't you two faced engineers buy an Otari? They need the buisiness, or are you guys too cheap?

I've read all of your posts in this thread. Your arguments are inconsistent.

Answers to your questions are met with more questions with no end in sight. When overwhelming evidence is presented you change the subject.

Now that last paragraph about Otari and eBay, etc… hmmm... alcohol? And on a week night – shame on you! :D
 
Last edited:
I like analog because of what it does to my ears. I love my Tascam 4-track porta-studio and record almost everyday. I tried some digital software that my friends have. They sound different to me and I don't really like it. I saved all last summer and mowed alot of grass so I could have my 4-track. I am saving this summer to buy another 4-track. This way I will have 8-tracks (professional type system). I heard the Beatles only had 4-tracks so I don't feel that bad now, but 8-tracks will make me very, very happy.


Analog rules!!!!!!!!!!!!

Digital stinks!!!!!!
 
Quantagee said:
I like analog because of what it does to my ears. I love my Tascam 4-track porta-studio and record almost everyday. I tried some digital software that my friends have. They sound different to me and I don't really like it. I saved all last summer and mowed alot of grass so I could have my 4-track. I am saving this summer to buy another 4-track. This way I will have 8-tracks (professional type system). I heard the Beatles only had 4-tracks so I don't feel that bad now, but 8-tracks will make me very, very happy.


Analog rules!!!!!!!!!!!!

Digital stinks!!!!!!
Now if you could only sync those two units, like you could if they were digital.
 
Quantagee said:
I like analog because of what it does to my ears. I love my Tascam 4-track porta-studio and record almost everyday.
Yet more proof that it's not digitals imperfections that make the difference, because nobody could reasonably claim that 4-track portas have a transparent sound. :P

And I agree. The stuff I did on 4-tracks sounded way better than the things I did with my 8-tracks for a long while. I just couldn't handle the relative clarity and transparency that an 8-track gave me. That Yamaha would make anything sound good. :)

I tried some digital software that my friends have. They sound different to me and I don't really like it. I saved all last summer and mowed alot of grass so I could have my 4-track. I am saving this summer to buy another 4-track. This way I will have 8-tracks (professional type system). I heard the Beatles only had 4-tracks so I don't feel that bad now, but 8-tracks will make me very, very happy.
Totally off-topic, but when I for a while shared rehearsal space with another band (early 90s) we had two 4-tracks. You don't get an 8-track studio in any reasonable sense of the word, but you can record four tracks, mix to stereo and add two more tracks to that without much quality loss. I used to sync a drum machine, record bass, lead guitar and either a piano or a rhythm guitar. Mix that to stereo on the other porta, while adding a synth-line during the chorus during the mix. We'd then add lead vocals on one track and background vocals on another.

Quite complex arrangements, all in glorious stereo, and no tape hiss to talk about. :)
 
Quantagee said:
I like analog because of what it does to my ears. I love my Tascam 4-track porta-studio and record almost everyday. I tried some digital software that my friends have. They sound different to me and I don't really like it. I saved all last summer and mowed alot of grass so I could have my 4-track. I am saving this summer to buy another 4-track. This way I will have 8-tracks (professional type system). I heard the Beatles only had 4-tracks so I don't feel that bad now, but 8-tracks will make me very, very happy.


Analog rules!!!!!!!!!!!!

Digital stinks!!!!!!

But you said the following previously in this thread:

Quantagee said:
In my opinion, analog has it's attributes, and digital has it's attributes. The two are being used together in a positive way for their strengths in the modern studio. Analog has a certain sound that is sought after by some producers and engineers. Digital has editing abilities that are impossible to do in analog. Analog and Digital can both sound the same or different depending on who is in the driver's seat.

Your most recent post sounds like someone playing the role of his stereotype analog fan.

Ok, 'fess up! Whose alter ego are you?

Besides, the Beatles never had to use that fourth track because Paul was dead.
 
Last edited:
Beck said:
But you said the following previously in this thread:



Your most recent post sounds like someone playing the role of his stereotype analog fan.

Ok, 'fess up! Whose alter ego are you?

Besides, the Beatles never had to use that fourth track because Paul was dead.

Really? I thought they used all 4 tracks because they did overdubs. They added more tracks than the band could play (this is called overdubbing or sweetening). I could be wrong, but I think the Beatles used all 4 tracks.

I saw Paul on the tele a fortnight ago and I see he is alive. I guess you are wrong about Paul being dead. Anyway, I want 8-tracks because I wnat pro sounding recordings and 4 track is just home recording level quality.You see, with 8-tracks I can double up on the tracks and record to a fatter tape head width. I record guitar on 2 tracks instead of 1. It is all about the sound here.
 
Last edited:
Quantagee said:
I saw Paul on the tele a fortnight ago and I see he is alive.
What you saw was not real Paul... it was a digital duplicate of him. They could not do it with John, 'cos his persona was way too authority resistant to overcome, and then knowing about connections between Georg and Higher Spirits, they even did not dare try it with Georg. I think Ringo is still outthere for real, doing well, selling digitally remastered rock'n'roll compilation ;)

also, after reading last few posts, I must say: "Hey, guys! No mo' beer!" :D

And, Tim, how on earth am I supposed to roll something which looks like a line of printed text: yaday-yaday-dot-aveeeeeeee? I ain't see nothing to roll in there.... i'm rollong eyes - :rolleyes:
:D :D :D

/later
 
Dr ZEE said:
What you saw was not real Paul... it was a digital duplicate of him. They could not do it with John, 'cos his persona was way too authority resistant to overcome, and then knowing about connections between Georg and Higher Spirits, they even did not dare try it with Georg. I think Ringo is still outthere for real, doing well, selling digitally remastered rock'n'roll compilation ;)

also, after reading last few posts, I must say: "Hey, guys! No mo' beer!" :D

And, Tim, how on earth am I supposed to roll something which looks like a line of printed text: yaday-yaday-dot-aveeeeeeee? I ain't see nothing to roll in there.... i'm rollong eyes - :rolleyes:
:D :D :D

/later

I saw Paul and he was alive. I could be wrong, but I know he is still making music. John is not alive even though he made two new songs. Maybe that is the digital representation you are talking about. Really, it's true. I thought that John was alive in 1995 because I watched the video about the Beatle's. It was on around thanksgiving in 1995 and I stayed up all three nights to see it. I recorded it and watched it for three more days. I skipped school because I wanted to see every detail about recording the Beatles. George Martin was the producer and he is now knighted by the queen. Paul is now Sir Paul and he still makes good Beatley type songs. The two songs Free as a Bird and Real Love were not John then. They took his vocals off of a cassette tape and put it onto a big 8-track recorder. That is why analog is so good because they can do that and make you think that John was there, you know?
 
Quantagee said:
I saw Paul and he was alive. I could be wrong, but I know he is still making music. John is not alive even though he made two new songs. Maybe that is the digital representation you are talking about. Really, it's true. I thought that John was alive in 1995 because I watched the video about the Beatle's. It was on around thanksgiving in 1995 and I stayed up all three nights to see it. I recorded it and watched it for three more days. I skipped school because I wanted to see every detail about recording the Beatles. George Martin was the producer and he is now knighted by the queen. Paul is now Sir Paul and he still makes good Beatley type songs. The two songs Free as a Bird and Real Love were not John then. They took his vocals off of a cassette tape and put it onto a big 8-track recorder. That is why analog is so good because they can do that and make you think that John was there, you know?
I'm still not quite sure. Could you please elaborate further on your premises?
 
Dr ZEE said:
And, Tim, how on earth am I supposed to roll something which looks like a line of printed text: yaday-yaday-dot-aveeeeeeee? I ain't see nothing to roll in there.... i'm rollong eyes - :rolleyes:
:D :D :D

Copy and paste it in your browser. Or you can just roll your eyes, or roll your own. At least everyone is rolling something. ;)

http://soimmature.com/fun_stuff/blinddate.avi
 
Back
Top