Analogue Vs Digital

[FOKI26]

Further thoughts on analogue vs digital mixing desks….

Last night I had the chance to use 2 desks side by side, 1 analogue Mackie desk, and the big digital daddy Yamaha 02r…

Obviously looking at the 02R this thing looks the biz (it’s fooookin massive)and has loads, loads, loads more features (recording, fx, sequencing facilities, digital recall, automation etc)…. But I have to say when it came down to sound quality the little 16 channel Mackie blew it clean out of the water (with regard to how dNb sounded through it anyway).

I played a few of my (and some real) tunes through both and the tunes just sounded so much better (and easily noticeable, not just a slight difference) on the Mackie…. The bass response was just so much more full on and ‘in ya face’ as the saying goes, and sounded so much warmer… All the sounds seemed to sit and gel together better, whilst on the O2R each sound could clearly be heard in isolation, the bass was drastically weaker, and again seemed to sound removed and separated from the other sounds…. This I imagine is good (if not very good) for some styles of music but didn’t suit the dNb sound IMO. If i'm honest i actually thought the EQ on the bass had been cut on the 02R, it was that weak in comparison....and for the record, both desks had totally flat EQ settings.

The benefits, and functionality of the digital desk however obviously outweighs the Mackie (or any analogue desk) by a long way cos you can just switch it on, dial up your track and you’re away, but with the analogue desks you can spend ages getting the eq, levels, sends, etc all set up so they’re just right, and this can obviously seem disheartening when you’ve got a killer idea, and want to get it down asap….

My conclusion (and I’m far from an expert), but on sound quality alone I think analogue desks (for dnb) have the edge over digital desks in a BIG way…. But this is just my opinion based on what i saw and heard (loud) last night.

In addition to that, and having read a lot of comments from dNb producers of late a lot are saying they’re moving away from the digital domain for exactly this same reason and have started to use analogue desks, and using real outboard again to process their sounds to get the sound that made dnb what it was in the first place, back again.

I know which type of desks I’ll be using in future, put it that way !!!!!

Foax

[Tobes]

my thoughts are this,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


i dont really know many producers who use analogue desks as they can slow down production in a digi studio, and to be honest you contradict your self by using an analogue desk then burning your track to cd :smiley2:


out of the guys i know personally who use O2r's are:
<UL>
<LI>PHD</LI>
<LI>Mc Conrad</LI>
<LI>Blame</LI>
<LI>Intense</LI>
<LI>Jcat</LI>
<LI>Myself</LI>
<LI>BBC radio studios</LI>[/list]


and the people i know who have sold their O2r's dont use any desk at all, just make everything internal in their pc's, my choice will always be hands down digital, once youve run any of those sounds through any analogue to digital converter, whether it be a wav or burnt to CD or hard drive you have lost the analogue distortion that you were after.


just my 2 pence, ive used analogue and digital and i know which i prefer http://www.itstooloud.com/smileys/smiley10.gif

[Tobes]

oh,,,,,unless i was using a neve of course http://www.itstooloud.com/smileys/smiley36.gif

[-rich-]

how about a nice behringer?

[FOKI26]

[QUOTE=Tobes]


and to be honest you contradict your self by using an analogue desk then burning your track to cd :smiley2:


[QUOTE]


Hardly a contradiction, as the soundwill have been recorded through analogue (To give it that warm sound in the first place), recorded and then converted to digital on CD (the sound doesn't change once it's left the desk andbeen recorded)....and not digital desk to digital medium....(that's the point i tried to make here).


I read some't similar in an interview with Calyx (i think) where he said he still uses digital equip mostly, but he puts most of his samples through analogue gear to gain warmth and then re-samples them for use in his digital set-up for ease of use.... Calyx isn't an artists i buy for personal reasons (i don't like his tunes), but clearly a clever producer and a trained engineer who knows how to push his sounds to the maximum, hence his methods.





As for the producers you mention, i'll make a point of saying that i DO NOT think these all sound the same to me (so don't shoot me down), but there is a definite clean and similar sound to what most of those and other producers in this whole atmosheric side of the dnb scenethat do..and if i'm totally honest it's that cleanness that i don't like about a lot of dNb these days, and (not an insult here) but probs the main reason why i haven't bought any of their tunes.


There are a lot of tunes around that sound like they've been made on a computer...and it's as simple as that (again my opinion)...... I'm not saying i don't like this sound, it's just that you can clearly tell the difference in some cases. Or the alternative is using solely a computer using sample CD's full of sounds made 90% of the timewith analogue gear.





I can remember about 3/4 years back when the whole 'crap' dnB bangers were coming out and i can remember saying to a mate in a club that the tunes sounded cold, and there was no real bass to them anymore.... Soft synths and the whole digital ageare to blame if you ask me...I jus don't like most of them (altho Oddity which i used last night gave me 1 good sound):smiley2:.





I'm not saying one is better than the other, i just think cetain methods suit certain styles.. for me dNb (that i'm into) is about impact, and that impact comes from punchy, warm sounds that were born out of analogue equipment... a lot of todays productions don't meet that expectation anymore (hence the amount of cold crap available today)and i'm not the only one to notice this (hence why my comment about a lot of producers going back to using traditonal methods again).


The example i saw last night astounded me as both mixers were sat right next to each other in the same room with the same speakers etc, and the results clearly spoke for themselves in regard to the dNb sound being played through them. It was an example being given by a trained engineer of the difference, and how one isn't better than the other, just more suitable for some situations rather than others.





Each to their own... my advice to producers is, don't go for the all singing and dancing thing if you want to sound like something that has been made on something else. If you do want that digital sound, then go digital....





This digital vs analogue argument will never be resolved and will go on for years,it's all about what you like about the sound they produce and what you're trying to achieve.


Phew !!!!!


Foax

[FOKI26]

[QOUTE]


once youve run any of those sounds through any analogue to digital converter, whether it be a wav or burnt to CD or hard drive you have lost the analogue distortion that you were after.


[QUOTE]





Don't agree with this, sorry mate... but i record into a PC from an analogue desk and i don't lose any distortion... what i hear from mydeskis the same aswhat i hear when it'srecorded.





Foax

[-rich-]

yep thats because the distortion gets converted too! May be able to
hear a slight difference to a cd if you have good hearing. but at 24bit
(most modern pc soundcards) it shouldnt make any audible difference
whatsoever.

[FOKI26]

It's only the same as using a distortion box (or anything)as an insert on your desk... the distortion (or whatever you used) wouldn't disapear, regardless of what you recorded into, it will record the soundoutputting from the desk (mangled or not !)





By red lining my desk (to make it sound warmer/distorted or whatever) it works by distorting the signal going into the desk, then that sound passes through the insert (if using one; i.e a compressor), then to the EQ, then to the fader which is then sent to the main output.

[Tobes]

Don't agree with this, sorry mate... but i record into a PC from an analogue desk and i don't lose any distortion... what i hear from mydeskis the same aswhat i hear when it'srecorded.





dude the difference between analogue and digital sound is a thing called "THD" (total harmonic distortion)


i have mentioned this before in another thread, and its something adam will be studying soon, but if you record any analogue sound and then record it to any digital format you are emediately turning your sound waves into square waves and you add even more distortion.


analogue thd is every third harmonic which is distorted, and with digital soundthe square wave has every second harmonic distorted, this is why in my mind its a bit of old school chat the analogue thing, the only way to apreciate true analogue sound is to never alow the track to hit any digital format, if you go to a big studio and record through a neve desk you will be recording straight to analogue tape or you would be wasting a lot of time and money.


back in the days analogue was analogue with no exceptions, but this is the digital domain, most music ends up in the digital domain nowadays.


i hope you understand why i said i find it contradictive to record analogue sound onto a hard drive or cd and then to be taken to a cutting room.


anyway just my view but every one to their own http://www.itstooloud.com/smileys/smiley10.gif

[Tobes]

This digital vs analogue argument will never be resolved and will go on for years,it's all about what you like about the sound they produce and what you're trying to achieve.


definately no arguments here mate, your points are valid, but im just not such a traditionalist, i think most people would have trouble nowadays telling whether a sound was recorded through an analogue or digital desk.


and seriously man, have you ever mixed down a track using the automation on a digi desk, its mental man, i seriously think sacraficing a tiny bit of distortion for all that power is well worth it, then you can be even more creative with your sound :smiley4:


anyway i better get some sleep, kinda busy lifestyle at the mo http://www.itstooloud.com/smileys/smiley18.giflots of work.

[FOKI26]

That may well be the science behind it, and yeah I think I’ve read some’t similar before…

However, in practice the difference (to the ear) shouldn’t be noticeable, and in this day and age I don’t think it is in most cases….Like I said any distortion or overdrive I get from an analogue desk isn’t lost ‘whatsoever’ when recorded/converted to a digital format as that added distortion warmth then becomes part of the sound that leaves the desk and then into the a/d converter (which should re-create exactly what goes in).

What you say about not being able to tell the difference between the 2 (dig vs ana), again I agree (in principal) that on a digital desk you can emulate the warmness of analogue (and probs to the same degree if applied correctly on a decent desk), but you don’t get that instant character that such desks provide simply by switching them on (as per my example of the 2 side by side, both with falt eq, no fx etc).

The other thing to consider is that some desks sound drastically different to others and that is something that will never be replicated, unless they start producing digital clones of every classic desk, which obviously defeats the object of going digital in the first place….
It’s the same reasons as why people still use crap 8 track tape, old fx boxes, tube and valve amps, vinyl and such…it’s not cos they’re better, it’s because they add that little something to the sound that in the digital domain is nigh on impossible to recreate accurately. These days there are plenty of plug-ins replicating such things, and some are good (most are poor imo)… Like the tape delay in logic which is very impressive (one of the few plug-ins that actually surprised me), but put it alongside the original roland space echo (which it’s supposed to emulate) and it doesn’t even touch the sides imo…

For me it’s these little things that matter…..and can make or break a tune…

I’m no expert on this thing, and as I said in my first post the clean sound of digital is obviously better for some productions, whilst the over riding of analogue gear and the warmth it produces obviously suits other styles….

Each to their own…. God I wish I’d never started this thread !!!!

[Lazarus]

I have been enjoying getting kicks and snares out of the computer, and through the budget Yamahamixer I advised my mate to buy.


As far as my ears tell me they definately sound better when an analogue step's been put in the process.


As far as automation, that can be handle by software, or controllers, some of which have the automated faders...these could be used in tandem with an analogue desk surely...Edited by: Lazarus