Digital vs Analog article

Discussion in 'Recording Gear and Equipment [BG]' started by funnyfingers, Nov 18, 2013.


  1. funnyfingers

    funnyfingers

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
  2. bkbirge

    bkbirge Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2000
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Disclosures:
    Endorsing Artist: Steak n Shake
    Summary: working with high end gear in high end studios with pro players and pro technicians with a decent budget and days to record = sounds good no matter what format you choose.
     
  3. jdwhitak

    jdwhitak Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Location:
    Greenwood, IN
    I can't believe people are still doing comparisons like this. The war is over! Digital won and rightfully so.

    I think we should compared 1080p HD to a black and white tv from the '70s to see which one people prefer.
     
  4. seamonkey

    seamonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. two fingers

    two fingers Loud Mouth Know It All Blowhard

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Try telling that to studios that still continue to use radio station compressors from the 50s and 60s.

    Studio guys are an interesting bunch. You think lots of religious opinions (and I mean bass as a religion) fly around this forum, try going on a recording forum sometime. What a mess.
     
  7. Chromer

    Chromer

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    To be fair, those old radio compressors give some very unique (and pleasant) distortions which are only just starting to be modelled accurately in software.
     
  8. bkbirge

    bkbirge Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2000
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Disclosures:
    Endorsing Artist: Steak n Shake
    Hmmm. I love my La2a and UA 176 compressors. I have solid audio reasons for that love also. Making music in a computer may work for you guys but I hate it, it kills my workflow and turns production from purely aural to mostly visual. Tedious. The sound can be great in either format, it's the workflow process of making records that is my deciding factor.
     
  9. funnyfingers

    funnyfingers

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    I just want to know can any of you listen to these clips and tell the difference. There is one where I hear noise and that is tape.
     
  10. Ukiah Bass

    Ukiah Bass Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2006
    Location:
    Mendocino County, California
    By the time a recording is mixed, compressed, mastered, and compressed yet again for iTunes, much of this debate is academic. People groovin through ear buds won't hear a difference.

    PS: That's a cool blog. I looked through some of the other reviews and +1!
     
  11. jdwhitak

    jdwhitak Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Location:
    Greenwood, IN
    I've seen some of those forums. They are completely ridiculous. People really obsess over minutiae. I have to admit that I bought into some of it for a while. Came to my senses though and my wallet thanks me for it.

    On a side note, it's as if there as been no technological progress in the last 50 plus years for these people. I used to play guitar and the height of guitar amplifier technology was apparently back in the 60's. It's all just a rehash of Fender, Marshal, Vox, etc. these days. Nothing really new and innovative.
     
  12. esa372

    esa372 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Excellent point.
     
  13. D.A.R.K.

    D.A.R.K. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    What's funny is the biggest selling points in the digital world are its' analog emulations.
    I like where things are going, it's getting pretty cool these days.
    I don't miss tape machines, but I sure as hell miss the decision factors they required when tracking, and still miss nice analog consoles- especially for live events.
     
  14. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Location:
    Seweracuse, NY
    Digital has opened up decent quality recording and production to the masses. Or the average musician could go back to trying to record on awful cassette 4 tracks or 8 track reels, rather than 16, 24 or 48 track digital for what amounts the same or less money.
     
  15. musicman666

    musicman666 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    Location:
    ca
    To my ears there seems to be a little more bass extension on the digital recordings and much less background noise compared to the analog recording.
     
  16. D.A.R.K.

    D.A.R.K. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Absolutely correct. Digital medium has no added noise, and is capable of storing information with a much greater frequency response.
     
  17. seamonkey

    seamonkey

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    It could very well be if you're comparing LP as analog.

    There was a 1972 IEC amendment to the RIAA curve to cut rumble from warp and the turntables for LPs. Still debated in audio forums.

    With digital there are no warp or turntable rumble that can leak through. No need for extra eq curves to process the audio.

    There's no brushes to scrape dust from the LP groove. No angular velocity to worry about EQ on outside versus inside tracks.

    It's known that digital can capture 100% of the analog LP. i.e. Audiophiles couldn't tell differences in blind tests of digital recorded LP versus direct LP playback.

    There's no reason to over-compress CD quality audio, other than it's a popular thing to do.

    It's pretty amazing what can be done cheaply with digital on a home quality PC. Many generations of tracks, bouncing and mixing, with no unwanted noise build up :)
     
  18. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Location:
    Seweracuse, NY
    LOL. Bouncing tracks. Haven't even thought about doing that since moving to the digital age. I just group channels then add additional tracks.
     

Share This Page