• 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

#41
smo said:
I used to think like this.... not any more.

This argument is not a night-and-day difference that some people think it is.
A heavily compressed digital recording on spotify VS a top notch analog recording is not a fair comparison. The same way a lazy mixing engineer who scoops the mids out of every single source to make their job faster, should not be compared with an engineer who spends the time to balance a mix.

So lets be fair.

We might be able to tell the difference between CD's and Vinyl in a blind test, but both of these media have obvious limitations & benefits.
IME, anyone listening to an uncompressed, top quality digital recording and an analog source , will have a hard time consistently telling the difference in a blind test, if it weren't for artifacts (pops, hiss etc.) in many analog sources. And I would suggest a blind test would surprise some people how often they pick the uncompressed digital files as being superior.


Question - have you ever recorded to tape? Cos I feel this is a troll post.
I ask, cos it's a massive pain compared to digital. Not only is it more expensive, it's more time consuming, and has limitations, like how many tracks you can record to. Lets not even get into recording a group that isn't well rehearsed.....
Click to expand...


Cassette technology is over. I don't have enough money to record on tape. If there had been investment in cassette technology up to digital systems, things would have been different.
 
#42
All I can say is that I sure don't miss all of the analog recording gear I once had. Reel to reels and racks of outboard gear plus cables galore. I have more capability with an interface and laptop than I ever did with analog. I actually love the clarity and editing is a breeze. Whatever content that might get lost with digital is made up for by the fact that I don't have to hear hiss and other noise and coloration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MonetBass, srosenthal13 and Lowbrow
#43
I have to LOL at this. The Atmos Beatles remixes sound FAR, FAR better than my Beatles vinyls. And that's just one example. Flat? Lifeless? Not even close. I assure you, it's just as real as analog.

Methinks this is an example of either fearing what you don't understand, or new stuff is change and change is bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MonetBass
#45
Stating that digital is the 'most pure' and therefore better (only for that reason) is a bit like saying that water that is the most pure is the best. Ok. Try out a glass of water that has the lowest amount of impurities -- Distilled water.

How does it taste? For most people, it's lifeless.

Compare that to a high quality mineral water. It's the impurities that give it the 'delicious' flavor. To an extent the same is true with audio.

Yes, highest quality modern digital does not have discernible hiss and noise, although they are present, just in a much smaller amount. The part of digital that can feel 'sterile' is the lack of (VERY SUBTLE) natural overtone distortion. This is why many modern mixers (even those who work 100% 'in the box') look for opportunities to add musical harmonic distortion in small amounts. This practice can add overtones and pleasant imperfections to the signal that can create much more depth in a mix. Often this can be referred to as 'color'
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Dominic D
#49
icarus88 said:
Digital sound: it sounds FLAT. Lifeless, "tinny", cold, empty. It doesn't feel loud when it's loud.

CD quality is 16 bit 44,100Hz sample rate, meaning, it takes a sample of the sound wave 44,100 times per second, and the bit depth is how many steps are available for it to place the amplitude of the sampled wave. i.e., say the bit depth allows the amplitude to be placed at a resolution that makes 1, 1.5, & 2 available. Therefore, if the sample's amplitude is 1.6, it will be placed at 1.5, if it is 1.75, it will be placed at 2. And, 44,100/sec might seem like a lot, but what ultimately happens is the wave ends up in squared off step shapes. It is no longer a smooth, curvy wave. AND, a CD song is one wave containing the whole of the song. That's why everything sounds flat, because it literally is. With analog, every instrument, the reverbs & delays, all keep their own space in the Ether.

I HATE mp3!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAGGGHHHHH!!!!!

They are utterly SICKENING! Digital has killed music. Streaming has $#@-(& it in the #@$$#-. Artists aren't making money anymore cuz no one buys albums anymore. I mean, there's still a significant number of us that still do buy the CD, but we are the minority by far.

I'm so mad that I have to use a computer to make music these days. $600 for Ableton Live 11 Suite (& thats $150 off) & it still sounds like crap. And what's the point of 192,000Hz interfaces if your CPU can't handle it if your song is anything more than just a beat (and, in the mixdown, the max it'll be is 44,100 anyway).

Digital destroys hi hats! Transients suffer the worst, bass second.

I had started getting CDs of tapes I had, then I heard analog and bought back all my tapes, and all the more tapes I could find until they went extinct.

Yes, convenience wins, and quantity over quality: everyone just wants a million garbage songs on an iPod. But are they really listening/enjoying? Everyone I've ever seen with an iPod just skips thru songs constantly. They never just put it on and let it play. Occasionally they find a song and, “oh, I love this song!"… then they skip it halfway through!


Analog will always be the superior medium, and if people actually respected music as an art form instead of entertainment, digital would not have taken over.
Click to expand...
Um, okay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dominic D
#50
icarus88 said:
All this new "3D sound" and 5.1 or 7.1 surround is a reaction to the digitalization of sound, it's all a means to compensate and make up for what was lost during digitization. When sound was analog, we didn't need surround sound or 8 speakers or special "dynamic bass boost" functions on stereos, you just needed a good stereo amplifier (150W+) and an EQ and 2 proper speakers and you got "surround sound" because the recordings were analog.

Moreover amp simulators are poopie
Click to expand...
As mentioned above, we had various competing quad audio systems back in the later 1900s (you probably aren't old enough to remember that). It didn't take hold because of the aforementioned "competing systems"; the manufacturers shot themselves in the foot doing that with each one's proprietary concept. With the advent of the CD the manufacturers learned their lesson, and worked together on the development of it (primarily Sony and Philips).

As to the latter part of your argument (I think we need some sort of clinic for this), for fourty-some odd years now I have been perfectly happy with my Aragon 2004 and a pair of Magnepan speakers. When I have it turned up I suspect the amp is averaging about 1 watt or so/channel, and it gets loud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jim nolte
#51
actually this matter is personal, some like dull flat robotic super sterile digital sound, some like warmer more natural sound, tastes and colors are indisputable. soon we will all be extinct, AI musicians are coming, no one will pay you
 
#54
Most peoples negative reactions to digital is the only digital music they have ever heard is streamed music on their phone or computer which is so compressed that there is little “ depth “ to it, if they ever had a chance to sit down in the sweet spot of a high quality stereo system running a 24-bit SACD player their opinion is probably going to be a lot more positive if not blown away how good it sounds, unfortunately 24-bit SACD was introduced about the same time that Apple released their first IPod and the masses choose convenience over better sound quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MonetBass, /\/\3phist0, timmo97 and 1 other person
#55
jim nolte said:
Most peoples negative reactions to digital is the only digital music they have ever heard is streamed music on their phone or computer which is so compressed that there is little “ depth “ to it, if they ever had a chance to sit down in the sweet spot of a high quality stereo system running a 24-bit SACD player their opinion is probably going to be a lot more positive if not blown away how good it sounds, unfortunately 24-bit SACD was introduced about the same time that Apple released their first IPod and the masses choose convenience over better sound quality.
Click to expand...

Why do I have to pay so much money to listen to good, uncompressed audio?

This is unfair
 
#56
icarus88 said:
actually this matter is personal, some like dull flat robotic super sterile digital sound, some like warmer more natural sound, tastes and colors are indisputable. soon we will all be extinct, AI musicians are coming, no one will pay you
Click to expand...
isn't that what they said when keyboards became popular in the 80's (spoiler alert - that's exactly what a lot of people were saying).

as far as your first sentence, it's just not based in reality, but you've already got your mind made up. If you wanna regress back to the 50's, have at it.
 
#57
moon-bass said:
isn't that what they said when keyboards became popular in the 80's (spoiler alert - that's exactly what a lot of people were saying).

as far as your first sentence, it's just not based in reality, but you've already got your mind made up. If you wanna regress back to the 50's, have at it.
Click to expand...


If I had thousands of dollars to pay, I would be happy to

Audiophiles will know what I mean
 
#59
moon-bass said:
isn't that what they said when keyboards became popular in the 80's (spoiler alert - that's exactly what a lot of people were saying).

as far as your first sentence, it's just not based in reality, but you've already got your mind made up. If you wanna regress back to the 50's, have at it.
Click to expand...

Those keyboards were played by humans, not an artificial intelligence
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back