Electrical magic. Analogue. Lunacy.

[emanresu]

Hey.

What's your take on digital vs. analogue?

Whenever I speak out that something "magical" happens with all analogue gear, the response from bluntly honest and reasonable people will start to seem more lunatical than my original thoughts.
People who speak about digital being as good as anything analogue could provide, and trying to reason with me, trying to bring me back to sanity.... tbh, THIS feels like lunacy. The enthusiasm sounds a bit "off".

The thing is, I've had a few experiences with other people's audio gear that plainly demonstrates that my computer sucks. I go home, put on the same thing, and it sounds bland. Takes a bit of time to acclimate again.
When the signal gets converted into digital, then back, it just can't compete with full analogue. That's the case with pretty much anything involving music.

[jads57]

It depends on the actual piece of equipment being used. Digital is definitely always improving by larger amount of Technologies. I’m not sure that’s the correct way of saying that,Lol!

Also what works for studio or computer is not what works for live applications. This has always been true even with analog or even tube technologies. I say use what works for the situation and don’t worry about the actual tech being used to achieve it.

[emanresu]

When there is a debate "analogue vs. digital", the fact that the signal is converted twice goes under the radar.

[ruger9]

I'll always prefer analog. But there is some digital gear than IMO has "cracked the code", or at least come so close it's become splitting hairs... for example, my Roland Blues Cube Artist sounds better than alot of tube amps I've played. But I'll always be a tube amp guy.

The Boss RE-202 is a fantastic digital "version" of their RE-201 tape echo... without the cost and maintenance required. Again splitting hairs... I'd be willing to bet there are very few people who could tell the difference blindfolded, playing it. And even fewer who could tell the difference just listening.

But I'll always want a handwired tube amp and a real tape echo rather than a Roland Cube and Boss delay. (I do not own a real tape echo, it's cost is not justifiable to me, considering how great the digital representation sounds and performs.)

[BBGuitar]

It's kind of like when monks argued over how many fairies could dance on the head of a pin.

[Strat-itis]

Yep. Digital works for some stuff, but not others. For example, sounds pretty decent for Rhodes, but not Hammond. Digital will never replicate analogue for the deep trademark analogue sounds.

[ombudsman]

High end digital gear operated by a pro generally sounds very different from home recording digital rigs. Of course, there is low quality analog gear too, and there are analog parts in every digital studio.

The differences in sound imo are driven by overall quality and skill rather than a vs. d .

[Strat-itis]

The differences in sound imo are driven by overall quality and skill rather than a vs. d .

Which is why pro Hammond is always analogue? They don't have skill?

[ombudsman]

Which is why pro Hammond is always analogue? They don't have skill?

You've never seen a Hammond XK series on a gig ?

[Cunamara]

Yep. Digital works for some stuff, but not others. For example, sounds pretty decent for Rhodes, but not Hammond. Digital will never replicate analogue for the deep trademark analogue sounds.

"Never" is a long time.

And, of course, solid state can still be analog.

I know a guy who designs electronics for and operates a high-end home audio company. He recently replaced tube power amps in his offerings with house-made class D power amps. He spent a couple of years designing them rather than using an off-the-shelf version to get what he wanted, but to his ears they are much superior to tube power amplification.

The litmus test is whether people can hear the difference in a blindfold test and guess which is which at a higher hit rate than chance. We have demonstrated multiple times in the forum that we often cannot tell the difference between a solidbody and an archtop guitar purely on the sound of it. Tim Lerch, in particular, posted a very interesting video about this as has Jens Larsen. This, too, might very well be the case with digital and tube/analog sound production equipment, if not now then in the future and not so very far away.

Says the guy who has virtually all analog gear… I think the only digital thing in my signal chain right now is a reverb pedal (TC Electronic Hall of Fame).

[Strat-itis]

You've never seen a Hammond XK series on a gig ?

I used to own one. Noone would ever record with digital, unless it's Coldplay. Musicians use them because they're portable and brand new and nothing else.

[Gilpy]

I love the sound of my tube amp and my vinyl records.

I also love the convenience of my 19 lb Quilter amp and my Ipod that has 4500 songs on it and fits in my pocket.
Maybe analogue is better sounding, but most listening these days is casual, and convenience is important.

I have spent many years in recording studios, both as a performer and engineer. 24 track tape sounds great, but I think many have forgotten the tedium of endless rewinding and editing by splicing tape. Digital sounds great, allows for a faster workflow, and really it's the performance that counts. So, for me digital wins in the studio.

For gigs, I prefer a tube amp.

[Spook410]

Kind of moot. From a practical standpoint this debate ended quite a long time ago. What isn't a product of digital signal processing yet, will be in the near future.

Of course, I'm a big fan of pscycho-acoustics as I've learned to just go with it. If I think it sounds better, it does. Even if it really doesn't.

[Strat-itis]

"Never" is a long time. And, of course, solid state can still be analog.

Yep. Like I said, a lot of digital works and sounds satisfactory to good to sometimes as good. Not always tho. Many instances you need the real shiz for it to sound authentic. I think Hammond is a good example. Something about it, you can literally hear how there's no contour and warmth to the mids with digital. While with the electro-mechanical, it somehow imparts that texture on the sound.

[DawgBone]

I recently decided I will never make a habit of using digital guitar stuff in my chain because using a driven tone and playing loud the harsh digital artifacts are revealed to me in the higher registers. It's actually audible using a clean tone just not quite as obvious. I've had to get rid of some nice pedals cause they show their true colors plainly when gain+volume are higher. I can't live with that when better sounding analogue gear is still widely available.

Digital's only advantages are cost and convenience, period. That's the driving factor behind it. It's cheap for the musician and more profitable for the companies making it. Digital recordings do not sound as good, especially with modern mastering i.e loudness wars and the tendency to compress the crap out of everything and then boost it way up. Way too crispy in the top end. Listening to an album worth is ear fatiguing, no wonder everyone just does singles these days, lol.

[Christian Miller]

I love the sound of my tube amp and my vinyl records.

I also love the convenience of my 19 lb Quilter amp and my Ipod that has 4500 songs on it and fits in my pocket.
Maybe analogue is better sounding, but most listening these days is casual, and convenience is important.

I have spent many years in recording studios, both as a performer and engineer. 24 track tape sounds great, but I think many have forgotten the tedium of endless rewinding and editing by splicing tape. Digital sounds great, allows for a faster workflow, and really it's the performance that counts. So, for me digital wins in the studio.

For gigs, I prefer a tube amp.

Afaik quilter isn’t digital (well the reverb chip is digital). Solid state analog is underrated.

A lot of the alleged poor performance of solid state amps is on the fact that they were used in cheap combos with low end speakers and construction and so on. And really terrible distortion circuits.

But I feel now as cheap digital options take over the bottom end of the market solid state is starting to get a bit more recognition as a lightweight alternative used in pedalboard and other pro quality lightweight amps.

Of course jazzers have known this for a while.. Look at polytones for example. But I feel these amps have got a lot better at emulating drive sounds as well as cleans. Probably down to industry innovators like Peavey, SansAmp and Quilter. And Session in the UK.

(The early 90s Peavey Bandit has developed a bit of a reputation as pinching way above its weight among jazz players haha)

And here’s the obligatory reminder that class D is nothing to with digital.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tal_175]

Let's not forget that analog-to-digital-to-analog conversion occurs in virtually all recorded music today. Even modern vinyl is likely produced from digitally stored recordings. Cassette tapes were an analog technology, but when digital CDs arrived, people couldn't wait to replace their cassettes.

[DawgBone]

Let's not forget that analog-to-digital-to-analog conversion occurs in virtually all recorded music today. Even modern vinyl is likely produced from digitally stored recordings. Cassette tapes were an analog technology, but when digital CDs arrived, people couldn't wait to replace their cassettes.

That;s a great point but I have heard the digital recording put to analog record and it still sounds better to me than digital recording to digital medium. There are basically two pathways, warm with attenuated highs or there is clarity with a high end that will lead to earlier ear fatigue. I generally prefer even cassette tape over the CD other than being able to skip to my favorite songs. I do know that things are generally mastered differently depending on what medium it's going to but it seems like digital recording and production methods have basically stamped out making "albums" on a bunch of different levels starting with the level of compression used in mastering. Maybe it should be federally legislated for maximums because everything is designed to be like an auditory punch in the face now, lol.

[emanresu]

I heard they had just finetuned the cassete-tape tech to the max when CD came along and just ran over.
And it was like starting from zero once again with questionable results, freeloading on people liking comfort.. skipping tracks whenever they pleased.

[Litterick]

Cassettes were awful.

[DawgBone]

Cassettes were awful.

They were warm and rich sounding.

[sgosnell]

One man's 'warm and rich sounding' is another man's awful. And if you want to hear awful, 8-track tapes were really awful. Especially after the tape was eaten inside the player. Fortunately they didn't last long. If you like the cassette sound, play the CDs through really cheap players and speakers. Cassettes died because they deserved to die, due to far better technology for most customers. But you can still record music to cassette tapes if you have the necessary hardware. Mine is long gone. And I still remember playing 78rpm records on the huge radio/record player my parents had. That was about as warm and rich as I would ever want to hear, scratches and all.

[Bob_Ross]

The litmus test is whether people can hear the difference in a blindfold test and guess which is which at a higher hit rate than chance.

:Mic drop:

Until someone's been in the hot seat trying to pass a double-blind ABX test -- and passing -- all of their "THIS sounds better than THAT!" proclamations are just fantasy.


Edit: Which is not the same as saying that all of their "THIS sounds better than THAT!" proclamations have no value. One of the most useful aspects of strong sonic opinions, regardless of how unsubstatiated they might be, is that they are tremendous timesavers.
- "Archtops sound better than solid-bodies!" Fine, we'll use an archtop on this recording. Count it off...
- "Hammonds sound better than Nords!" Fine, we'll rent a Hammond for this session, nothing more can happen today, everybody go home and practice until next week.
- "Analog sounds better than digital!" Fine, don't waste your time looking at (or listening to) these [points to a shit-ton of digital equipment], just pick one of those [points to the small handful of analog equivalents].

[DawgBone]

If you like the cassette sound, play the CDs through really cheap players and speakers. Cassettes died because they deserved to die, due to far better technology for most customers.

Exaggerations.

[emanresu]

I wouldn't describe analogue as "warm and rich". I would say it sounds more real.