famous beagle
Well-known member
I often wonder about our "reel" (heheh) reason for being analogue enthusiasts.
I love reel-to-reels. I'm a newbie when it comes to using them (I cut my teeth on cassette 4-tracks, but I've just gotten into the world of R2Rs), but for a long time, I've been drawn to them. Nothing looks cooler than a R2R. So, I can honestly say, the sound is really only a part of the allure to me. The rest is just the aesthetic quality.
I also love old tube amps and/or new ones built in the old non-master volume style.
But here's the thing. All these machines (R2Rs and tube amps) weren't old and antiquated when they were used by artists in their prime (such as the Beatles). The machines were state-of-the-art new. They were the highest-tech DAWs of the day. The consoles were loaded with all the "newest features" and "highest fidelity" and blah blah blah.
They were fitted with all the buzz words that we (in this forum) ignore today in our choice of the antiquated analogue medium.
So, I was just wondering ... are there just two kinds of people? Are there the romantics like us that dwell on the sentimental aspects of art and the equipment that's employed in its production, and then are there the tech-heads that love to keep up with the Joneses and think "all that glitters is gold?"
Granted, analogue sounds different; I'm not saying that this is all psychological. But like I said, those machines were brand new and shiny at one point and represented the state of the art. If we had grown up in that era (and I'm sure there are those here that did---at 36 years old, however, cassette 4 tracks were the big deal when I was 15 and just getting into it), would we still be shunning the new for the older style? Or would we recognize that level of technology as desirable, sufficient, and not in need of improvement?
Discuss!
I love reel-to-reels. I'm a newbie when it comes to using them (I cut my teeth on cassette 4-tracks, but I've just gotten into the world of R2Rs), but for a long time, I've been drawn to them. Nothing looks cooler than a R2R. So, I can honestly say, the sound is really only a part of the allure to me. The rest is just the aesthetic quality.
I also love old tube amps and/or new ones built in the old non-master volume style.
But here's the thing. All these machines (R2Rs and tube amps) weren't old and antiquated when they were used by artists in their prime (such as the Beatles). The machines were state-of-the-art new. They were the highest-tech DAWs of the day. The consoles were loaded with all the "newest features" and "highest fidelity" and blah blah blah.
They were fitted with all the buzz words that we (in this forum) ignore today in our choice of the antiquated analogue medium.
So, I was just wondering ... are there just two kinds of people? Are there the romantics like us that dwell on the sentimental aspects of art and the equipment that's employed in its production, and then are there the tech-heads that love to keep up with the Joneses and think "all that glitters is gold?"
Granted, analogue sounds different; I'm not saying that this is all psychological. But like I said, those machines were brand new and shiny at one point and represented the state of the art. If we had grown up in that era (and I'm sure there are those here that did---at 36 years old, however, cassette 4 tracks were the big deal when I was 15 and just getting into it), would we still be shunning the new for the older style? Or would we recognize that level of technology as desirable, sufficient, and not in need of improvement?
Discuss!
