Is there much different in sound between digital and analog processing?
- Thread starter LeviathanMetal
- Start date
Gomez
Member
Well... that's a pretty serious debate, so buckle up.
I personally prefer analog units even when digital is getting really close.
I haven't heard any EQ plug that does what my Massive Passive does or a comp that behaves like an analog one. Analog is not perfect and that's what I like about it. I also like being able to adjust parameters by twisting pots and flicking switches rather than clicking on them.
I have nothing against plugins, (I used to but not anymore) but I will stick to analog.
I personally prefer analog units even when digital is getting really close.
I haven't heard any EQ plug that does what my Massive Passive does or a comp that behaves like an analog one. Analog is not perfect and that's what I like about it. I also like being able to adjust parameters by twisting pots and flicking switches rather than clicking on them.
I have nothing against plugins, (I used to but not anymore) but I will stick to analog.
Fox Mulder
The Truth Is Out There
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
I like how the analog distortion and saturation sounds, otherwise I think digital is superior in almost everything, but I don't get the hype on the "tube everything".
When someone emulates dbx 166XL and 160A compressors as a plugins, I will definately consider getting it, because they is one of the best sounding and easiest to use and read solid state compressors I have ever owned/used. And they are pretty cheap too. I've used klark technics, bss and many others that cost many times to that, but 166 compressor just is the shit for me and 160A is one of the best bass compressors ever.
Two words: control surface
When someone emulates dbx 166XL and 160A compressors as a plugins, I will definately consider getting it, because they is one of the best sounding and easiest to use and read solid state compressors I have ever owned/used. And they are pretty cheap too. I've used klark technics, bss and many others that cost many times to that, but 166 compressor just is the shit for me and 160A is one of the best bass compressors ever.
Two words: control surface
very interesting... i think that EQ's can be replicated very closely but what about compressors and limiters? I've never had the oppertunity to get hands on with any compressing hardware and im currently in the debate of spending the money on a nice one for our newly built recording studio...
crillemannen
Member
Do you know what kinda thread you just started hahah 
.
Search around on gearslutz, they have a few comparison threads
going on over there.
Often the results where that peaople thought the best sounding wav was the analog but it was vice versa.
The digital domain has really stepped it up, and plugins from UAD
is getting really close, i belive they are the best sounding on the pluginmarket today.
And it all comes down to work flow, and what your customers demand.
My opinion is that there are better ways to spend your cash in the beginning.
Cheers
.Search around on gearslutz, they have a few comparison threads
going on over there.
Often the results where that peaople thought the best sounding wav was the analog but it was vice versa.
The digital domain has really stepped it up, and plugins from UAD
is getting really close, i belive they are the best sounding on the pluginmarket today.
And it all comes down to work flow, and what your customers demand.
My opinion is that there are better ways to spend your cash in the beginning.
Cheers
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
I really tend to enjoy adjusting sounds by using physical knobs and faders rather than dragging settings around on a screen with a mouse. Not sure if that counter-weighs the drawbacks of tough recall and the need to service gear. As said, the plug-ins are rapidly getting better, and as our DSP and processing power increases, I can only imagine that the plug-ins will get even better. The biggest issues now seem to be getting compression and saturation/glue right ITB. This is part of the reason I got a GSSL made to use on the mix bus. All the plug-in comps seem to shrink the mix or just simply not work in a musical manner.
Oddly enough software reverb units still don't seem to be on par with the old EMTs and Lexicons. Given that this technology was digital almost from the outset, I can't fathom why it hasn't been ported over to native plug-ins. Our current CPUs have hundreds of times the power of the early Lexi chips but for some reason our algorithms aren't as good. We're using convolution to model hardware that is decades old... how bizarre.
What does tend to perplex me is situation like where Nordstrom went across to all ITB and his mixes seemed to get instantly worse. I don't know whether that was a workflow adjustment thing, change in hearing/preferences, or simply ITB showing its flaws but it freaked me out. His better/earlier productions were a major selling point to me of trying to go as analogue as possible. Plus there are guys like CLA that mix almost exclusively with outboard and they're in this whole other league...
Oddly enough software reverb units still don't seem to be on par with the old EMTs and Lexicons. Given that this technology was digital almost from the outset, I can't fathom why it hasn't been ported over to native plug-ins. Our current CPUs have hundreds of times the power of the early Lexi chips but for some reason our algorithms aren't as good. We're using convolution to model hardware that is decades old... how bizarre.
What does tend to perplex me is situation like where Nordstrom went across to all ITB and his mixes seemed to get instantly worse. I don't know whether that was a workflow adjustment thing, change in hearing/preferences, or simply ITB showing its flaws but it freaked me out. His better/earlier productions were a major selling point to me of trying to go as analogue as possible. Plus there are guys like CLA that mix almost exclusively with outboard and they're in this whole other league...
so do you recon its more the "hands on" or the "sound quality" that people tend to lean towards?
Ermz
¯\(°_o)/¯
The latter. The former certainly helps though.
At the moment we are limited by computer hardware to only be able to create rough approximations of analogue gear. Emulation isn't quite there, but digital does have its own strengths when it's not trying to emulate anything. Linear phase EQs like the Algorithmix Blue for instance are amazing..
At the moment we are limited by computer hardware to only be able to create rough approximations of analogue gear. Emulation isn't quite there, but digital does have its own strengths when it's not trying to emulate anything. Linear phase EQs like the Algorithmix Blue for instance are amazing..
crillemannen
Member
There is deffenetly an advantage in using a control surface, but that wasnt not the question right??
But i agrre with Ermz that turning knobs makes you use your ear more than sitting around with a mouse all day.
OMG tried algorythmix last week when i mastered an album, it was truly amazing. Did something with the stereo image in a good way, and the eq was almost to good to be true
But i agrre with Ermz that turning knobs makes you use your ear more than sitting around with a mouse all day.
OMG tried algorythmix last week when i mastered an album, it was truly amazing. Did something with the stereo image in a good way, and the eq was almost to good to be true
devouredremains
Matt Van Daele
But is that the gear or the skill of the mixer that puts them in another league? If CLA mixed ITB it would still sound like a CLA mix.
ahjteam
Anssi Tenhunen
But there is the problem that CLA doesn't mix ITB. He even has atleast two pieces of every gear he has and has some gear with knobs glued to one position that he always uses
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may07/articles/cla.htm
Chris Lord-Alge leaves most of his hardware gear fixed on a single favourite setting. If he needs to use another setting, he buys another 1176...
http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_chris_lordalge/
devouredremains
Matt Van Daele
But there is the problem that CLA doesn't mix ITB. He even has atleast two pieces of every gear he has and has some gear with knobs glued to one position that he always uses
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may07/articles/cla.htm
http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_chris_lordalge/
Most people are aware of that. What I'm saying is that people have their own sound no matter what gear they use. And I guess it blows the "presets are no good" comment people like to use right out of the water.
meowadays the difference is so minute that alot of engineers are going completely ITB. what you do with comp, reverb, eq ect. makes more of a difference than the gear you use.
that being said, analog is definitely better sounding
(i love this new emoticon!)lol starting to become quite a serious debate here haha... i know that anyone who has ever been involved in any sort of music production has this argument in their head aswell so spill it all out here 
devouredremains
Matt Van Daele
lol starting to become quite a serious debate here haha... i know that anyone who has ever been involved in any sort of music production has this argument in their head aswell so spill it all out here
Haha yeah. I just wanted to state my opinion that you don't need expensive/vibey/boutique outboard to make good mixes/recordings.
If someone wants to drop money on outboard I always suggest quality microphones, preamps and conversion before anything else. Those are certainly more important than any outboard compressor or equalizer.
