The Dub Discussion Board: Do you use analog or digital recording equipment?

Do you use analog or digital recordin... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

The Dub Discussion Board » DUB PRODUCTION » OTHER » Do you use analog or digital recording equipment?

« Previous Next »

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post

Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author

Message

Holy Ghost

Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 08:36 am:

I was just wondering what is more popular, analog or digital machines, for multitracking in the dub world...

the interruptor

Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2001 - 10:34 am:

i am working fully digital as i wouldn't want to miss the sound manipulation and editing possibilities modern equipment offers. on the other hand i love to have a variety of analog external effect devices (analog delay, selfmade tape delay,..)
recording on analog tape gives you a "natural compression" especially if you set your recording level close to tape saturation. on digital equipment you can use compressors or dedicated plug-ins like "magneto" to approximate the same thing. of course you can also resort to using an analog tape machine as an "external effect device" on certain tracks.

looking forward to other board users answers..

Looter

Posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 01:19 am:

I use an analog multitrack recorder and im planning on getting a multi-channel interface card for my computer so i can bounce sets of tracks back & forth for processing, etc. I also have a newly acquired tape delay/spring reverb unit because i believe that its something you cant live without if youre making dub. I dont know what's more popular in the dub world, analog or digital, it depends on your personal philosiphy about making music. For me, analog is has more soul but digital can be very useful. So I'm going for a hybrid sort of rig. just remember: human beings are analog machines.

johny2bad

Posted on Wednesday, May 02, 2001 - 05:14 pm:

I think both sides have their advantages...
It depends on what your vision is...if you're nostalgic then analogue is the way to go...if you are looking ahead into breaking into new territories - then digital is a great avenue as well.
But i think analogue is more popular among hardcore dubbheads because of the personal feeling when mixing it up. The fact that you can use two hands to tweak the knobs and get immediate results makes a final mix have that spontaneous effect...like in old skool dub practically anything goes...even 'mistakes' or off-time elements give that raw edge...
in digital usually the tweaking is not in real-time...
I myself am getting into the hybrid set-up though.

dubcreator

Posted on Thursday, May 03, 2001 - 09:53 am:

I just use best of both worlds, i used to own a massive 24track 2" tapemachine which weighted about 120Kg and the 2"tapes which can record 20mins are so expensive about 120USD each. So i sold it and bought a heavy computer with a multi I/O interface. It can do the same and many more.
Nice editing on waveforms, small click somewhere... just remove it on the PC. On a analog machine quite impossible or you have to spend a lot of time to filter it out.
But all the rest in my studio is outboard gear, every single track from the computer is routed back into the mixingdesk(analog) i can't work with digital desks, they don't have knobs so not very intuitive, every tweak has to be planned with these digital desks.

DC

Ruu

Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2001 - 10:57 pm:

yo
i use only analog stuff fore recording no digital never digital is for pop music weak and wack music

like all the new drumcomputers are good for pop
but thatz wack
the TR 808 is the boss of all drumcomputers
cause hes analog and kiks your ass wit pumpin real hard beatz

ayo interuptor you are maybe are good producer cause i never heard of you but thatz weak that you are using digital bullshit equipment.
the best thing to make Music is still a drumset a bassguitar piano(or keyboard) a guitar some percussions and some voicing.

all you guys upon here think that music is a game or what. the interuptor is makin music for livin to get some cash thatz why he can use digital bullshit equipment. if he get some money out of it great. cause thatz his jooob!!

OR if your name is lee perry or you are another great producer like niney the observer
if you made for a long time good music with real equipment then itz no shame to turn over to digital bullshit equipment then you just trying to shape you sound in another style with other equipment.

but dont try that before you even get started with makin some music fi fun ya know!!!

like all the hip hop peopz
digital here digital there
Digital is for the computer for internet for playstion
i love all new digital stuff everything!!!!!!

But not in music

why you think perrys music soundz so good hä?
cause he dont use dem bullshit digital equipment

his sound is warm and true like the sound of a real life horn blown by a great jazz player.

now in jamaica allmost everybody produde his music digital
But live no one i said no one comes up without a live and real backing band

if you use the turntable live then you are a dj
but when you are a singer mc or aniting else then you need a band

peace to all man out there who keepin it real and holdin that shit down
death pon all wicked man and pon baylon
bo bo bo bo bo bo bobo bo bo bo bo

peace and dont diss me fi writin the truth down here inna the internet.
PEACE

Ruu
from germany

Mike Zee

Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2001 - 10:08 am:

(quote:
...every tweak has to be planned with these digital desks.
... /quote)

he he,

not sure why, but, DC, this made me smile. lol, I just was imagining a dub-producer seating and 'planing'.
*********

ok, my studio is (btw, I am sure that it is just what most producers have) a mixture of digital/analog. also, it is really hard to draw a 'border', because on the way from idea and instrument playing to final master mix there are too many a/d-d/a. Bunch of recording hardware (like guitar pedals for example) are actually digital things ;). So through the process of making track you just keep goings in-and-out from one 'world' to 'another' and back. Then, let's say you have analog mixer-desk, but at least some of your effect boxes (if not all) are 'digital things', but , you know only a portion of the mixing signals going through them and back to mix...., so there... where is the "border"?????
It's a meltin'pot. It's like we had a similar conversation on the other b-board about software-hardware...., some hardware gear this days are nothing but a 'dedicated software in the box'

, so it's a mixture....
********
I mix on analog mixin'console, but record on digital multi-tracks (akai DR-4s) and computer's HD, well, most processors are digital, some analog, and final mix-down (or master two track) goes to DAT or CD-Recorder.

regards n'respects,

/Mike Zee
******
zee dub lab

Mike Zee

Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2001 - 10:26 am:

and, Ruu,
you're a real TREAT, man, he he he,
reading your 'statements' is very intertaining

.

btw, did you atr least listen to Daniel's album. I don't think you did. So go and listen first befor 'shoutin'out' like a dog...., woofff ;)
here is the link for you,

be-well,

/Mike Zee

nemo shaw

Posted on Friday, August 17, 2001 - 05:16 am:

the question is irrelevant its not what you got its how you you use it - chuck out the manuals and use creative inspiration imagination and soul you got to be on fire

Nemo

Mike Zee

Posted on Friday, August 17, 2001 - 06:49 am:

Nemo, hi

,
what you are saying is good attitude for creation in any form of art.
But the reality is often more 'square' and less 'romantic'. And specifically in music production: the result of your work, do you like it or not, depends on what you have, and yes, how you use it. And you need manuals, and info/experience from other producers. As I understand this is what we are all here about, talkin'bout all kind of technical stuff.
I don't know,... for me it IS interesting to know what other guys have, use and how etc..., i see nothing 'irrelevant' in the question itself and the conversation here.

best regards,
N'respects,

/Mike Zee

Posted on Friday, August 17, 2001 - 11:22 am:

Hey Mike, what i mean is that with a digital desk you have to scroll through many menus before you even can find a delay orso. So the tweaks have to be prerecorded and not "on the fly" like Dub production has to be.

Mike Zee

Posted on Friday, August 17, 2001 - 06:36 pm:

DC! Hi

I think, (i thought..;), I knew what you mean..he he,
the thing is, I said it was sort of funny (humorous) for me to imagine seating and planning how you dub-mix will be (or shall be). To me it's like I never know before I have something played/recorded on multi-track, and then seat-down, playing-back and start moving things on the desk, adjusting effects parameters , messing around, experimenting etc..., then when (or if) I feel (hear) that something coming out interesting, then I sort of 'rehearse' a few times and then just go to recording, while I still keep the idea 'hot in my mind'..., and the thing is, that often I can't really think technically at this point, I often loos the idea about what actually I am doing from technical point, like if you ask me, what settings here, what effects etc...???, I would not be able to give you an answer, cos I don't keep track...,

well, but it's me, and I don't really have strong technical knowledge nor experience (formally speaking, you know).

On the other hand, well, I am not sure thou.., producers with big experience, like You, may actually do well using digital mixing desk. I mean, if you know pretty much what and how you going to do and you know pretty much what to expect from what your are 'planning'. But, even if you get friendly with 'pre-programmed' way of production, then you may lose that exiting part of the 'whole deal'. I mean, first of all 'mixing on the fly' is the coolest part here, it's like...I don't know..., similar to what musician feels playing instrument, i think, so all your mixes become each as 'one of a kind performance', and you know that even you yourself can not 're-play' it again the same way.
So, yeah, he he, when I look at digi-mixer, looking like a 'pad' with 10-12 sliders, fiew knobs .. I just say: ??? there is nothing TO PLAY here with (or nothing to play ON)... everything is virtual there. Well, I am talking about mixers which sort of affortable. There are bigger things, well, something like tascam tmd-8000, which looks pretty cool, but the price tag is 'cool' also...., man, for 8K !!!!, just think of what you can get with dub (or any kind of music) in mind for your studio.
*******

p.s.
speaking of 'virtual', you know what definition for the word in the dictionary, i've found?, here:
VIRTUAL: -a. being so in effect if not in fact.-

he he he, i love this definition,

,

be-well, man,
best...

/mike z

judith strand

Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2001 - 04:52 pm:

have you ever tried to add a digital delay thru analog ones

I think the result is amazing

I think the good idea is to mix analog and digital equipments so you can control the effects efficiently but keeping the weird sounds and loops...personnally i don't like digital dub (too digital)

though I make technodub I prefer old dub stuff (check glenmore brown with King tubby!!!!!)

dangerman

Posted on Thursday, December 13, 2001 - 01:41 am:

bwoy, this discussion could go on forever!!! after all is digital recording better that analogue? Is the music much more important? as for us, we use both digital and analogue. however, if we had the money, it would be strictly (use guessed it) analogue

dubstudios

Mike Zee

Posted on Friday, December 14, 2001 - 12:02 am:

***bwoy, this discussion could go on forever!!!
YEP!

**** after all is digital recording better that analogue?
It depends, i guess. I'd say there is nothing UGLIER than sound of cheap DSP ;). But bad analogue recording equipment makes it simply impossible. Digital gear bring REALITY of pretty good production into the hands of independent musician/producer.
****Is the music much more important?
I'd say: ABSOLUTELY YES!

***as for us, we use both digital and analogue.
As I know 99.99% of pro/and home-producers do use both nowdays. Some say: no-way, I'm 100% digital, but it's never true. Sound is ANALOG after all, you know... Some say: I do not use any digital sh***, but then they put their stuff on CD, he he ;), so there...

*** however, if we had the money, it would be strictly (use guessed it) analogue

Yeah, I'd say go analog as much as you have extra cash. However sometimes you need to think twice, really. Newer Hi-end digital gear/and even some software/with right computer-system combined with IMPORTANT TECH KNOWLEDGE!!!! may actually compete with analog world. But, again, it is not really easier way to go digital, there you really MUST know what you are doing to get most out of it.

keep talking , guys,

respects,
/Mike Zee
ZEE DUB LAB

Barkley

Posted on Thursday, January 03, 2002 - 08:22 pm:

Live mixing with a full array (rhythm keys, bass, theremin, technics deck and 808) with mackie 12 channel analog mixer and the KAOS pad filter has resulted in some interesting noise. Problem is the ease of post-edit. With digital the edits are visual and easier to work with.

Ideal hardware would be: Analog controls with (minimum) 8 channels of digital audio via firewire (no audio card / laptops) & throw in a sweep-pad and a small bank of realtime filters.

Tascam makes an analog knob style mixer with 4 channels of USB audio in, but the usb is too low bandwidth for serious work and the plastics aren't real sturdy.

Rob Boothe

Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2002 - 05:05 am:

I would have to agree with Mike Zee on this topic, it could indeed go on for ever!

As he said; analog is much more expensive to own and maintain than digital gear.

Is digital better?

Hell no!

Digital is a close approxamation of the analogue signal, meanig that no matter what you do, you will never capture the true "analogy" of the waveform like analog will. As well you will lose precious harmonics and slight distortions that make analog a beautiful thing.

In order to even come close you would need a sample rate of at least 192kHz, sample rate upwards of 48bit!

Basically your bigest system available. The closest available today is Pro-Tools HD, not very cheap.

In my opinion (thats all it is), it is best to utilize the powers of both worlds.

I track through an analog console to 2"tape (for intial sounds) then dump into a comp through the best converters I can get my hands-on (I would suggest Prism) and edit. Mix back through the analog console using mostly analog fx, down to 1/4" stero mastering tape.

Diferent use of Digital and Analog equip is how we all get our "own" sounds, both can be beneficial if used correctly.

dangerman

Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 12:42 am:

We have to confess that, here at dubstudios we use the best of both worlds. The problem with analogue equipment today, is...you guessed it, noise reduction and editing. The sound is superb..digital is...well very clean (too clean sometimes). Consider the old classics. Were they not recorded in the analogue domain? Howbeit, noise reduction has come a long way...and so has digital recording. We would conclude by saying, if you can record in the anaologue domain and edit using digital equipment i.e. software plug ins, then that is a good compromise. What does everybody else think? www.dubstudios.co.uk

.o2023

Posted on Saturday, April 20, 2002 - 06:20 pm:

I doesnt matter if analogue or digital is better. i could simply die for digital music. manupulating in the range of ms! on the other hand analouge sounds much better. with more soul in it. but i doenst really matter. it is the process. a cut of an crashing digital system may be equal to quality loss of recording from tape to tape to tape....

it's the process that is the REAL interesting thing!

bin_ez

Posted on Thursday, May 23, 2002 - 04:25 am:

Man, there's a lot of people saying a lot of the same thing here, and, in truth I'd kinda have to agree with everybody (especially RUU). Analogue sounds fifteen million times better (give or take). Its funny, I read and hear about this "amazing" 192kHz system which "almost emulates analogue!" Soon they'll have their 256kHz and so on, but I think they already have the answer and that is,.....analogue. The editing facilities are far more impressive with digital and I'm a huge fan of Protools, I think an analogue desk and an analogue two track machine would be ideal.

S_fish

Posted on Thursday, May 23, 2002 - 11:20 pm:

what is the different betwen a analogue mixin desk and a digital desk?

bin_ez

Posted on Friday, May 24, 2002 - 02:29 am:

Lots of things, but, mainly with a digital desk you are not really shown all the controls in front of you (like with analogue desks), but there will be one EQ section (for example) which can be applied to any or all channels.
This can be inconvenient when a fader might either represent an aux send or a tape return depending on which mode you are in......

Looter

Posted on Friday, May 24, 2002 - 05:12 am:

link

Above is the url for a discussion along the same line as this one from the tascam analog fourm.

sir_chin

Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - 12:18 am:

peace&bless,
pure analog path is the best, but -as rightly said above- we end up on a cd, anyway. nowadays...
i personally enjoy the flexibility and commodity of hard disk recording (let alone the cost of 2" tape) and go trough the best analogue equipment i can get into the daw. i used to mix in the daw and stay digital till the end but i am reconsidering going back to the board and mix in analogue going back to digital only at the very end for the dat master.
in the end it's up to us to have whatever we have sound the best.
one love.

brigite bardotwwn

Posted on Saturday, July 08, 2006 - 02:59 am:

Descriptions of pubs their atmosphereswwn

brigite bardotjmq

Posted on Saturday, July 08, 2006 - 06:06 am:

Ein Schloss, Ein Wurst, Ein Kopf !jmq

best nfl picks

Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 01:43 am:

betting line

Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 01:55 am:

best nfl picks

Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 02:21 am:

baseball picks

Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 02:51 am:

betting online

Posted on Tuesday, July 18, 2006 - 03:12 am:

Administration