• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Digital vs Analog article

#5
jdwhitak said:
I can't believe people are still doing comparisons like this. The war is over! Digital won and rightfully so.
Click to expand...

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
two fingers said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
#10
two fingers said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
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.
 
#13
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.
 
#16
musicman666 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 :)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back