Quantcast
Analog vs Digital Emulations - A culinary comparison - Page 3 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Analog vs Digital Emulations - A culinary comparison
Old 2 weeks ago
  #61
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
 
18 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Plugins have been delivering world class sounds for many years now, it's funny that people on GS are the ones that aren't caught up with that.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #62
Here for the gear
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deedeeyeah ➡️
if specific gear would be that much important, it should be possible to indentify gear upon listening to fully mixed/mastered tracks! however, no one can do so!
We don't strive for better sound for the listener to identify how we strove, we strive for better sound because it sounds better.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #63
Gear Guru
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
Plugins have been delivering world class sounds for many years now, it's funny that people on GS are the ones that aren't caught up with that.
It's because plugins aren't "gear"

It's not as bad as it used to be, but this place has its own Received Wisdom and you will see people stating these default opinions as facts every day. This whole thread and its early 2003 premise is a case in point.

Then you see the newbies pick it up from their reading and repeat it, or even more amusingly, get something scrambled up and repeat that instead.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #64
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
Plugins have been delivering world class sounds for many years now, it's funny that people on GS are the ones that aren't caught up with that.
"world class", they call those weasel words, no offense, but that is a subjective ball of nothing, again nothing personal...if the world accepts mediocrity, of course you can be world class and not very special at all, correct?
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #65
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLSD ➡️
We don't strive for better sound for the listener to identify how we strove, we strive for better sound because it sounds better.
define "better"
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #66
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
 
18 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
"world class", they call those weasel words, no offense, but that is a subjective ball of nothing, again nothing personal...if the world accepts mediocrity, of course you can be world class and not very special at all, correct?
I like weasels juts fine. Are you calling me a weasel? I don't agree with "mediocrity" though. But this is a silly thread so I'm not going to "debate."

Let me use a different phrase that might sound a little sweeter and sonorous. Some of your favorite records and songs were very likely mixed with plugins. This is what I meant by "world class." Even though, weasels aside, is rather plain language I admit. Wasn't trying to write a poem.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
"world class", they call those weasel words, no offense, but that is a subjective ball of nothing, again nothing personal...if the world accepts mediocrity, of course you can be world class and not very special at all, correct?
As a “class”, the entire television, film and recording industry has overwhelmingly accepted and is flourishing with digital technology - this includes plugins.

An A-level film has thousands of tracks of audio processed by automation, surround sound and high dynamic levels not possible in an all- analogue world.

That’s how I define “world class” in this context.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #68
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Haha! Bad analogy. The Star Trek "Replicator" is a better analogy. Except that it doesn't exist. And if it did, it would still use actual protein, sugar and starch molecules to synthesize different foods. So no... that doesn't work either.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #69
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
I like a good clean digital recording, pressing over vinyl any day of the week - I’m old enough to have suffered listening through the cracks, pops, hiss, wow and flutter plus poor dynamic range of vinyl through the early years of my musical life - no need to “wax” nostalgic about it now.

I enjoy a good memory lane session too, as long as they don’t become memory lapses.
Sonically, I agree. But there is more to the vinyl experience than sonics. People do pretend that sonics are superior, but of course, they are not.

It's the tactical aspect that people like. You hold the music in your hand. You can roll joints on the double album cover. You drop the needle in the groove. Having and maintaining a nice table. It's a culture. That's the deal with vinyl. And... this is the ONLY way musicians can actually make money from selling music anymore, providing that the customer is into vinyl, and values all that it brings.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro ➡️
Sonically, I agree. But there is more to the vinyl experience than sonics. People do pretend that sonics are superior, but of course, they are not.

It's the tactical aspect that people like. You hold the music in your hand. You can roll joints on the double album cover. You drop the needle in the groove. Having and maintaining a nice table. It's a culture. That's the deal with vinyl. And... this is the ONLY way musicians can actually make money from selling music anymore, providing that the customer is into vinyl, and values all that it brings.
I recall my sister driving me to the record department of the local department store - this was 1969 - in our parents’ 69 Pontiac Catalina. We were there to get me the latest Grand Funk Railroad album, the one with the red cover and reverse negative imagery. I relished the experience of opening the sticky, statically charged clear plastic wrapping, and the smell of fresh vinyl. I stared at that cover for ages while wearing out the record, which was fairly quickly.

I was all of 12 years old, and the album cost $5.13.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #71
Gear Guru
 
kennybro's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
I recall my sister driving me to the record department of the local department store - this was 1969 - in our parents’ 69 Pontiac Catalina. We were there to get me the latest Grand Funk Railroad album, the one with the red cover and reverse negative imagery. I relished the experience of opening the sticky, statically charged clear plastic wrapping, and the smell of fresh vinyl. I stared at that cover for ages while wearing out the record, which was fairly quickly.

I was all of 12 years old, and the album cost $5.13.
I recall going to see Floyd when they were doing Eclipse back about '71. I waited for it to come out, and when they released their next LP, I ran out and came home with... Obscured by Clouds! It was another year before I was able to tear the plastic off of DSOTM, but OBC remains one of my fave albums.

There was a famous place in South Chicago, called Hegewisch Records. I'd go there and just buy ten albums just because I loved the covers. So many gems discovered that way. Live at Leeds, Fun House, White Light/White Heat, Sabbath first, Zeppelin first, Kick out the Jams, etc... Those were the days of genuine rock, pop, funk music discovery.

Still, whenever in Paris, I spend time at Monster Melodies, just digging through the rare vinyl, always finding a few gems. Still got the vinyl jones big time. Unfortunately, the good stuff is a lot more than $5.13 these days!
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #72
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
I like weasels juts fine. Are you calling me a weasel? I don't agree with "mediocrity" though. But this is a silly thread so I'm not going to "debate."

Let me use a different phrase that might sound a little sweeter and sonorous. Some of your favorite records and songs were very likely mixed with plugins. This is what I meant by "world class." Even though, weasels aside, is rather plain language I admit. Wasn't trying to write a poem.
I am an old timer, made lots of "records" starting in the 70s.

The only possible digital record that might be a favorite is Nightfly but that one, alas, was early digital so no plug ins.

The reason I responded to you specifically, is that the problem I have seen over the past 10 years in my studio is that digital storage and good A/D recording (RADAR for me) is just fine and part of my work flow with no DAW or plug-ins.

For me, tape capture good, algorithmic de and re construction at micro level (plug-in) bad.

Final note, listen to Robert Johnson's 1920s recordings.

Ultimately, imo, we don't listen to the "sound", we listen to the performance.

RU
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #73
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
I like weasels juts fine. Are you calling me a weasel? I don't agree with "mediocrity" though. But this is a silly thread so I'm not going to "debate."

Let me use a different phrase that might sound a little sweeter and sonorous. Some of your favorite records and songs were very likely mixed with plugins. This is what I meant by "world class." Even though, weasels aside, is rather plain language I admit. Wasn't trying to write a poem.
not calling you a weasel, just colloquial language, imho, of course...

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
For the specific meaning in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Weasel word.
A weasel word, or anonymous authority, is an informal term for words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #74
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
 
18 Reviews written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️

Ultimately, imo, we don't listen to the "sound", we listen to the performance.

RU
+1 on that! Blues recordings are the perfect example, as you gave. I love those sorts of broken sounds, myself, intentionally sometimes.

Nightfly is a great record, I enjoy that one too.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #75
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennybro ➡️
Sonically, I agree. But there is more to the vinyl experience than sonics. People do pretend that sonics are superior, but of course, they are not.

It's the tactical aspect that people like. You hold the music in your hand. You can roll joints on the double album cover. You drop the needle in the groove. Having and maintaining a nice table. It's a culture. That's the deal with vinyl. And... this is the ONLY way musicians can actually make money from selling music anymore, providing that the customer is into vinyl, and values all that it brings.

Something many people miss is that the vinyl mix was meant to be like instant coffee.

Tape was the fresh ground.

Look at a Marantz amp, they have a button that says "Loudness Countour".

You would engage that or crank up your bass on your amp when you played the record.

If it was properly mix/mastered, the lows that were controlled during the cutting would come to life when the record was played on the proper equipment.

That was explained to me by Doug Sax at the Mastering Lab in 1971 while cutting the first record I produced.

As Bobby Eli says, more bass in all frequencies.

Weed had lots of seeds back in the day, do the math.

RU
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #76
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
I am an old timer, made lots of "records" starting in the 70s.

The only possible digital record that might be a favorite is Nightfly but that one, alas, was early digital so no plug ins.

The reason I responded to you specifically, is that the problem I have seen over the past 10 years in my studio is that digital storage and good A/D recording (RADAR for me) is just fine and part of my work flow with no DAW or plug-ins.

For me, tape capture good, algorithmic de and re construction at micro level (plug-in) bad.

Final note, listen to Robert Johnson's 1920s recordings.

Ultimately, imo, we don't listen to the "sound", we listen to the performance.

RU
If you’re recording straight up rock bands, that’s fine, but if you’re doing a lot of sophisticated sound design and synthesis, you’re going to fall, heavily, for modern plugins.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #77
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx ➡️
+1 on that! Blues recordings are the perfect example, as you gave. I love those sorts of broken sounds, myself, intentionally sometimes.

Nightfly is a great record, I enjoy that one too.
Lilttle Richard "Don't put a tuxedo on the funky blues".
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #78
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
Something many people miss is that the vinyl mix was meant to be like instant coffee.

Tape was the fresh ground.

Look at a Marantz amp, they have a button that says "Loudness Countour".

You would engage that or crank up your bass on your amp when you played the record.

If it was properly mix/mastered, the lows that were controlled during the cutting would come to life when the record was played on the proper equipment.

That was explained to me by Doug Sax at the Mastering Lab in 1971 while cutting the first record I produced.

As Bobby Eli says, more bass in all frequencies.

Weed had lots of seeds back in the day, do the math.

RU
The loudness contour button button was on every consumer amp of the period, it engaged bass frequencies to compensate for the fletcher munson curve.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #79
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
If you’re recording straight up rock bands, that’s fine, but if you’re doing a lot of sophisticated sound design and synthesis, you’re going to fall, heavily, for modern plugins.
Let me paraphrase:

If you're shooting a movie on 35 mm film, that's fine, but if you are going to do a lot of sophisticated graphics, you are going to fall for modern CGI.


I will watch the film, thanks.

Not a big Beatles fan, but a big George Martin/Emmerick fan.

Too bad he wasn't able to that sophisticated sound design and synthesis, think how good Rubber Soul could have been!

4 track, tape, mix as you record.

I could go on for days, lol.

RU
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #80
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
The loudness contour button button was on every consumer amp of the period, it engaged bass frequencies to compensate for the fletcher munson curve.
Not every, actually, only the high end.

The rest were left with bass.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
Let me paraphrase:

If you're shooting a movie on 35 mm film, that's fine, but if you are going to do a lot of sophisticated graphics, you are going to fall for modern CGI.


I will watch the film, thanks.

Not a big Beatles fan, but a big George Martin/Emmerick fan.

Too bad he wasn't able to that sophisticated sound design and synthesis, think how good Rubber Soul could have been!

4 track, tape, mix as you record.

I could go on for days, lol.

RU
It’s 2021, not 1965. Rubber Soul was good for its day, but we’ve moved on, if not in terms of songwriting, certainly we have better fidelity. Much better fidelity.

I’m sure you could “go on for days”, but it would accomplish nothing - your preferences are fine for you, but they’re out of step in terms of how people work today.

I love 35 mm films from back in the day, but they’re presented to us, today, as digital files. And they look great , thanks to digital tools and the people who work hard to restore old films. The irony is you can see the films the way the originators intended you to see them, thanks to the reliability and repeatability of digital tools.

Last edited by Sharp11; 2 weeks ago at 04:29 PM..
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #82
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
It’s 2021, not 1965. Rubber Soul was good for its day, but we’ve moved on, if not in terms of songwriting, certainly we have better fidelity. Much better fidelity.

I’m sure you could “go on for days”, but it would accomplish nothing - your preferences are fine for you, but they’re out of step in terms of how people work today.

I love 35 mm films from back in the day, but they’re presented to us, today, as digital files. And they look great , thanks to digital tools and the people who work hard to restore old films. The irony is you can see the films the way the originators intended you to see them, thanks to the reliability and repeatability of digital tools.
Maybe listen to Led Zeppelin 1969 Glyn Johns engineered and then talk to me about "better fidelity". Not even music I listen to but please find me a rock band that sounded that good since.

As good, maybe, not "better"

So, you do know that "better fidelity" is a subjective judgement, a weasel word phrase?

We will agree to disagree, my opinion, is you are 180 out of phase.

The Fidelity of those records was better, much better.

RU
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #83
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
It’s 2021, not 1965. Rubber Soul was good for its day, but we’ve moved on, if not in terms of songwriting, certainly we have better fidelity. Much better fidelity.

I’m sure you could “go on for days”, but it would accomplish nothing - your preferences are fine for you, but they’re out of step in terms of how people work today.

I love 35 mm films from back in the day, but they’re presented to us, today, as digital files. And they look great , thanks to digital tools and the people who work hard to restore old films. The irony is you can see the films the way the originators intended you to see them, thanks to the reliability and repeatability of digital tools.
Paraphrase:

It's 2021, not 1610, Bach and Beethoven were good in their day, but we have moved on.

It's 2021, not 1955, Miles and Monk were good in their day but we have moved on.

LOL

RU
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #84
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 ➡️
It’s 2021, not 1965. Rubber Soul was good for its day, but we’ve moved on, if not in terms of songwriting, certainly we have better fidelity. Much better fidelity.

I’m sure you could “go on for days”, but it would accomplish nothing - your preferences are fine for you, but they’re out of step in terms of how people work today.

I love 35 mm films from back in the day, but they’re presented to us, today, as digital files. And they look great , thanks to digital tools and the people who work hard to restore old films. The irony is you can see the films the way the originators intended you to see them, thanks to the reliability and repeatability of digital tools.
"out of step with the way people work"?

pray tell who was the first to work that way because surely he was out of step with the way people worked before he worked that way, no?

I record on RADAR, 2" 24 Track Tape and Mix to 1/2" Anlaogue tape, very out of step.

No DAW, no Plug-Ins, no grid, trance not hypnosis.

Interestingly, I undestand that thought process, probably why every digital record has 5 db of dynamic range and a digital drum hypno beat.

For the record, I use digital every day, but not to process sound. Love my RADAR.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #85
Lives for gear
 
signalpudding's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
Paraphrase:

It's 2021, not 1610, Bach and Beethoven were good in their day, but we have moved on.

It's 2021, not 1955, Miles and Monk were good in their day but we have moved on.

LOL

RU
This forum is the worst sometimes.

“Fidelity: the degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced.”

I also like the way that old recording sound. They were in no way higher fidelity.

And Miles and Monk were criticized in their time for not being Bach or Beethoven. Just like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin weren’t Miles or Monk. Electronic music isn’t “real music” and isn’t made by “real musicians” who play “real instruments.” Andy Warhol isn’t Da Vinci. Even Plato thought the written word was going to ruin the next generation.

You don’t like modern music. That’s cool man, you can like and dislike whatever you want. But you don’t have to be a jerk about it.
Old 1 week ago
  #86
Gear Maniac
 
nbenford's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Maybe the problem is that we can now have shelves and shelves of garlic powder, and the tendency to over season can be too much for some to resist. “Back in the day,” we can say you maybe only had one clove of garlic, so it was more difficult to over season. I’m getting lost in the analogies here. Lol
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #87
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding ➡️
This forum is the worst sometimes.

“Fidelity: the degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced.”

I also like the way that old recording sound. They were in no way higher fidelity.

And Miles and Monk were criticized in their time for not being Bach or Beethoven. Just like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin weren’t Miles or Monk. Electronic music isn’t “real music” and isn’t made by “real musicians” who play “real instruments.” Andy Warhol isn’t Da Vinci. Even Plato thought the written word was going to ruin the next generation.

You don’t like modern music. That’s cool man, you can like and dislike whatever you want. But you don’t have to be a jerk about it.
No, was just using hyperbole, lots of interesting stuff out there.

Sorry you got the wrong impression, but I was trying to ask you to be more precise, as you are now.

Not trying to be a jerk, just want to talk logically.

I respect your opinion, but my ears tell me something different.

Essentially, you are talking about specs, and, agreed, if you look at the specs, why would anyone want to roll off the hights at 16k and smear the lows with tape compression.

That is objective but does not describe how the listener percieves it.

I think it sounds better.

I will try to upload a simple drum track with a digital mix and a tape mix.

Compare specs to real world performance if you will.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #88
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding ➡️
This forum is the worst sometimes.

“Fidelity: the degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced.”

I also like the way that old recording sound. They were in no way higher fidelity.

And Miles and Monk were criticized in their time for not being Bach or Beethoven. Just like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin weren’t Miles or Monk. Electronic music isn’t “real music” and isn’t made by “real musicians” who play “real instruments.” Andy Warhol isn’t Da Vinci. Even Plato thought the written word was going to ruin the next generation.

You don’t like modern music. That’s cool man, you can like and dislike whatever you want. But you don’t have to be a jerk about it.
As for "higher fidelity", the same question applies, higher specs or higher listener engagement? They could be the same, or not.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #89
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by signalpudding ➡️
This forum is the worst sometimes.

“Fidelity: the degree of exactness with which something is copied or reproduced.”

I also like the way that old recording sound. They were in no way higher fidelity.

And Miles and Monk were criticized in their time for not being Bach or Beethoven. Just like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin weren’t Miles or Monk. Electronic music isn’t “real music” and isn’t made by “real musicians” who play “real instruments.” Andy Warhol isn’t Da Vinci. Even Plato thought the written word was going to ruin the next generation.

You don’t like modern music. That’s cool man, you can like and dislike whatever you want. But you don’t have to be a jerk about it.
Seriously...

1. I don't know how old you are but the statement that Monk and Miles were criticized for not being Bach is, to put it kindly, way off base.
Both were revered all over the world for decades, much more impact in Europe with a far deeper classical tradition.

2. Electronic music is not real music? I did not say that, you did.

Seriously, if you call someone a jerk, please reference why you are saying that and don't say they said something they didn't.

Dave Grusin recorded synths on a disco album I did in 1976.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
signalpudding's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RADAR User ➡️
Seriously...

1. I don't know how old you are but the statement that Monk and Miles were criticized for not being Bach is, to put it kindly, way off base.
Both were revered all over the world for decades, much more impact in Europe with a far deeper classical tradition.

2. Electronic music is not real music? I did not say that, you did.

Seriously, if you call someone a jerk, please reference why you are saying that and don't say they said something they didn't.

Dave Grusin recorded synths on a disco album I did in 1976.
Many people from the classical music tradition dismissed jazz and thought it was fundamentally inferior to classical music. Just like the entire basis of this thread is people claiming music made with plugins is fundamentally inferior to music made with hardware. I listed those things as examples of people claiming one type of art as superior and dismissing what came after it as inferior.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 148 views: 33486
Avatar for alexvdbroek
alexvdbroek 23rd October 2019
replies: 72 views: 15317
Avatar for Remoteness
Remoteness 25th August 2019
replies: 28764 views: 3046811
Avatar for dasoundjunkie
dasoundjunkie 1 day ago
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump